Bruno Haible <[email protected]> writes: > Simon Josefsson wrote: >> > Usually, if you're going to replace stdlib.h, the cost of replacing other >> > headers is not much more. I don't think we need a separate module. >> >> The only reason would be if someone wanted to use stdlib.in.h from >> gnulib and would not want to use stdint.in.h from gnulib -- if the >> application doesn't use struct random_data that would be possible. > > Or simply, a package that does not want to import so much from gnulib. > Sam Steingold would say: "I need setenv(), which needs a declaration > in <stdlib.h>, so I get gnulib's stdlib.h replacement. But why all > this dozen of configure checks for stdint.h, when I don't need stdint.h? > Nor do I need this 'struct random_data'!" > > The workaround would be to split the 'stdlib' module into 'stdlib' > and 'stdlib-gnu'. Like in the attached patch. But I don't want to > apply this patch - IMO it's too much complications for avoiding one > dependency which 1. creates no executable code and 2. is likely to be > dragged it by other dependencies anyway.
I agree, I also don't want to see this patch applied unless someone makes a better argument or can describe a special use case where this is important. /Simon
