HEADS DOWN

[Daniel Eischen]

On Wed, 2 May 2007, M. Warner Losh wrote:

> In message: <20070501135439.B36275 at thor.farley.org>
>            "Sean C. Farley" <sean-freebsd at farley.org> writes:
> :
> : Questions for developers to help me proceed:
> : 1. Would POSIX or BSD be preferred?  By POSIX, I do not necessarily mean
> :     completely POSIX.  It can be some shade of gray.  For example, I
> :     added some checking to putenv() that is not mentioned in the POSIX
> :     spec but makes it closer to setenv() in its errors.

POSIX is preferred unless there are good reasons to deviate
from it for specific interfaces.  We are always free to add
non-POSIX functions for functionality not defined by the
standard.

> : 2. Would a series of stages to move from BSD to POSIX be
> :     acceptable/desired?  This is to avoid POSIX from overwhelming people.
> : 3. How about dropping putenv() altogether?  :)  putenv() is ugly.  My
> :     changes currently prevent setenv() from leaking like a sieve, so the
> :     need for putenv() should not be as necessary.  It could also be that
> :     shade of gray where putenv() stayed the way it is (wrapper around
> :     setenv()) while the rest can be POSIX.

putenv() is in POSIX.  It should definitely be implemented.

-- 
DE