On Wed, 12 Oct 2011, Matt Thyer wrote: > On Oct 12, 2011 3:25 AM, "Larry Rosenman" <ler_at_lerctr.org> wrote: >> >> I didn't say bug for bug, just not generate stupid errors like the ffs > one. >> -- >> Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. >> >> Chuck Swiger <cswiger_at_mac.com> wrote: >> >> On Oct 11, 2011, at 6:59 AM, Larry Rosenman wrote: >>> We will NOT support clang as the compiler for lsof unless the system > headers work the same way as gcc's do. >> >> That apparently means you won't support clang then, because it's not > intended to be (or ever going to be) fully bug-for-bug "compatible" with > GCC. In this case, at least, clang is reporting legitimate issues which > should be fixed, even if folks continue to build lsof with GCC from now > until the end of days. > > The elegant solution would be to avoid this problem altogether by > re-implementation of lsof using interfaces into the kernel that provide the > required information. > > bsdof anyone? > lsof is PORTABLE and available on LOTS of platforms. We have fstat, but lsof can be used between differing OS's. We've also asked for Kernel interfaces before, but no one volunteered to make the KPI for them. I'm sure if someone(tm) (not me, insufficient knowledge) was to make interfaces for ALL that lsof needs, Vic would implement it as it would make his life easier. -- Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler Phone: +1 512-248-2683 E-Mail: ler_at_lerctr.org US Mail: 430 Valona Loop, Round Rock, TX 78681-3893Received on Tue Oct 11 2011 - 15:55:30 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:40:19 UTC