Filippo Erik Negroni
filippo.negroni at btconnect.com
Fri Jan 12 16:45:58 PST 2001
Of course the point is to promote the patching of all packages.
I am working on a patch to Patch-2.5 itself.
I used ed-0.2 just as an example of what should be done.
I would even suggest the complete elimination of mktemp from any C library.
Try to use mktemp when you are working with a 64 terabyte fiberchannel
array and you know what I mean.
At 00:24 13/01/2001, you wrote:
>Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> > > BTW, ed-0.2 and Patch-2.5.4 use mktemp() instead of mkstemp()
> > send the patch please
> > --
> > Gerard Beekmans
> > www.linuxfromscratch.org
> > -*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
> > --
> > Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
> > and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
>You're gonna be swamped with stuff like this. Big number of packages
>gives this warning
>( and others with same nature ). This is not to say that the person who
>posted the patch
>did something wrong or got something wrong. I just have seen this warning
>at least 10 times.
>Therefore, the question is if you are going to patch each and every
>package out of that bunch or no.
>I refuse to think you're going to patch only such an important utility as
>( Sorry if it hurts somebody's feelings, but it isn't vim, is it ?)
>Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
>and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message
More information about the lfs-dev