[PATCH] ash: avoid GLIBC'ism %m

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi Denys,

On Fri, 21 Jul 2017, Denys Vlasenko wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Jody Bruchon <jody at jodybruchon.com> wrote:
> > On 2017-07-18 9:15 PM, Kang-Che Sung wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Markus Gothe <nietzsche at lysator.liu.se>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Actually last time I checked ‘%m’ is POSIX contrary to glibc’s deprecated
> >>> '%a’. However, I agree that it should not be used since at least uClibc can
> >>> be built without support for it.
> >>
> >> How come %m is POSIX when I didn't see any mention of it in this page?
> >> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/fprintf.html
> >
> > It does not appear to be part of POSIX or the Single UNIX Specification. The
> > glibc man page (as of 2016-12-12) even indicates that it is a glibc-specific
> > extension:
> >
> > *m *(Glibc extension; supported by uClibc and musl.) Print output of
> > /strerror(errno)/. No argument is required.
> 
> This sounds like every libc has already conceded to implementing it.
> 
> Let's benefit from it then?

No, not every libc. I would not have spent the time and effort to develop
the patch, contribute it, rework it and contribute a second iteration if
it was not for a good reason now, would I.

Ciao,
Johannes