Re: printf and -m

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

> Christos has posed a philosophical policy question in the guise of a
> technical one.  Writ large: should NetBSD generally follow Linux or
> Posix?  Or neither?

jkl makes some good points (though I certainly don't agree with all of
them, I think they all should be considered).  But, in this particular
case, I would point out that printf() is not just a POSIX-standardized
thing; it is also a C-standardized thing.

Perhaps jkl would also argue that the C standard is equally irrelevant
here, but I think that argument has to be made, not silently assumed.

> Does the patch represent an improvement?  ISTM the answer is Yes,
> because it makes other software easier to port to NetBSD.

That is not the only consideration.  By that criterion, NetBSD should
fold up shop and recommend all its users join the Linux monoculture.

In particular, this patch also makes it easier to write nonportable
code and harder to catch it, because it will let %m slip through,
leaving such uses as nasty surprises for those trying to port to other
environments that don't toe GNU's line.  If anything like this goes in,
I would argue that it should be optional, off by default.  At the very
least it should be possible to turn it off.

/~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B