Il 08/06/2012 12:19, Pedro Alves ha scritto: >> > Have you any plans to address these problems? In particular, it does >> > seem odd to place a burden on libc authors of porting gnulib to it, >> > rather than just not supporting those functions which require >> > non-standard APIs on such libc's. > I've heard such rants as well. The rants are IMO, misdirected. For instance, > IIRC, gnulib's freadahead use is caused by musl's printf not being posix > compliant, causing gnulib to pull in its printf replacement, which doesn't > work > on musl. A library that is new, actively maintained, and that calls itself > a "C/POSIX standard library" should really address that by making it's printf > posix compliant, so that gnulib's fallback doesn't even get built. It seems > that > nobody who is interested in musl has looked at gnulib's config.log to > understand > why does gnulib think musl's printf is not good enough.
While I agree with this, perhaps we can follow the suggestion and replace "if (freadahead (f))" with "if (freading(f) && !feof(f))" in closein.c. Paolo
