Missing error_print_progname in new snapshot.

sjhill at realitydiluted.com sjhill at realitydiluted.com
Mon Mar 27 13:52:19 UTC 2006


> Why should a header provide a prototype for something that is not in 
> libc.so? Why should libc.so provide a dummy error_print_progname() to get 
> any app compiling? If someone takes the time to provide a correction to 
> error.c to have real error_print_progname(), then it has a use to enable 
> it, but until then you can add the = NULL; dummy to the non-working app as 
> well.
> 
That is not the point. The point is that you are not doing enough
testing before you check stuff in. You build gentoo with uClibc and think
that it is enough. It is not! buildroot and all the packages contained
in it must build. We do not care about other Linux distributions. We
care about buildroot. If you are going to continue to develop on uClibc,
then before you check stuff in, you do an entire buildroot to make sure
things still compile. If a package breaks because of your changes, fix
things BEFORE checking them in. If you don't know how to fix, DO NOT
check your stuff in anway. Post to the mailing list for help or input
and we can solve the problem together. Otherwise, quick checking in stuff
that breaks the buildroot build system. It is sloppy and reflects poorly
on the uClibc project as a whole.

> Audit header files. Remove prototypes for all functions that are not 
> supported ...
> 
Sounds like a great idea. It should not be done at the expense of a
broken buildroot.

-Steve



More information about the uClibc mailing list