Re: Proposed submissions for the revision from The Open Group

[David Hopwood <yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Garrett Wollman wrote:
> <<On Mon, 9 Jan 2006 18:47:58 GMT, Andrew Josey <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
>said:
> 
>><string.h>
>>stpcpy()
>>stpncpy()
> 
> Rather odd functions of questionable utility.  Why these and not
> strlcpy()/strlcat() from OpenBSD, which seem to have a wide following
> and actually has improved semantics over the functions on which they
> are based?

I agree with this comment.

>>strsignal()
> 
> Should be part of the base standard.  It's always been something of a
> wart that we have had perror()/strerror() and not psignal()/strsignal(),
> given that the two indicators are otherwise very similar in
> construction and both are needed for correct implementation of a shell.

   The  strsignal()  function returns a string describing the
   signal number passed in the argument sig.  The string  can
   only be used until the next call to strsignal().

This is not threadsafe. Please fix that; POSIX shouldn't be adding more
non-threadsafe APIs. Since there are only a small number of constant
signal names, it would be sufficient to keep the signature the same, but
guarantee that the returned string can be used indefinitely.

-- 
David Hopwood <yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>