Subject: Re: syslog_r (Re: CVS commit: src/lib/libc)
To: Christos Zoulas <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: SODA Noriyuki <email@example.com>
Date: 10/28/2006 03:12:08
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Oct 2006 13:57:38 -0400,
firstname.lastname@example.org (Christos Zoulas) said:
> | > There is no precedence for that that I know of. How about "_a"?
> | I prefer somewhat more longer suffix, but maybe "_ass" is obscene. ;)
> | How about "_ss" (signal safe), since the word asynchronous is not only
> | used for signals, but also I/Os and other things.
> Heh, I am fine with _ss, or _a.
> | And how about using "syslog_a" or "syslog_ss" as the async-signal-safe
> | variant of the syslog() function, instead of "syslog_r"?
> | I think people expect "syslog_r()" function behaves just like syslog()
> | except its extra argument and multithread-safeness, but the actual
> | implemetation have lots of differences, as written in
> Well, the whole point of making syslog_r() async-signal-safe was because
> OpenBSD code assumes it is. Perhaps we keep syslog_r() as it is
> [async-signal-safe] and create a syslog_a() alias?
I prefer either
- Only provide "syslog_ss" (or "syslog_a"), and do not provide "syslog_r".
- Provide both "syslog_ss" (or "syslog_a") and "syslog_r".
"syslog_r" does support floating point formats, "%m", and sends the
time of the event to syslogd(8) just like syslog(3).
"syslog_ss" does not support those things.