Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> Ok to install?
>
> OK, with the following caveats:
>
> * Please put the standard implementation first, and the Windows implementation
> second. That'll make it easier to read.
Yup.
> * Please use standa
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Ok to install?
OK, with the following caveats:
* Please put the standard implementation first, and the Windows implementation
second. That'll make it easier to read.
* Please use standard GNU indenting style, e.g.,
char *
getpass (const char *pr
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> The resulting code would look awful, and I think it would be weird to
>> have plenty of non-glibc specific hacks inside glibc. But keeping
>> things in sync is a good idea, and I can work toward that goal f
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The resulting code would look awful, and I think it would be weird to
> have plenty of non-glibc specific hacks inside glibc. But keeping
> things in sync is a good idea, and I can work toward that goal for
> this module if you want.
If it's too much
Paul Eggert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> +* getpass.c: Add WIN32 implementation. Conditionalize use of
>> +termios.h, tcgetattr, tcsetattr and __fsetlocking. Remove some
>> +GLIBC specific code.
>
> Why remove the GLIBC specific code?
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> + * getpass.c: Add WIN32 implementation. Conditionalize use of
> + termios.h, tcgetattr, tcsetattr and __fsetlocking. Remove some
> + GLIBC specific code.
Why remove the GLIBC specific code? I'd rather keep gnulib in sync
with glibc as
This builds on Mingw32, uClinux/uClibc, Debian, NetBSD, OSF/1, HPUX,
Solaris. The current one doesn't work on Mingw32 (that doesn't have
the tty concept) nor uClinux/uClibc (doesn't have fsetlocking). The
recently installed self-test work on Mingw32 and Debian. Martin has
submitted copyright pap
Simon Josefsson wrote:
> How about this patch?
>
> 2005-08-23 Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * getpass.c (__fsetlocking): Define to nothing unless we have it.
>
> 2005-08-23 Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * getpass.m4: Check for __fsetlocking.
Looks good to me.
B
Simon Josefsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Further, lib/getpass.c look quite unreadable. Even the code in glibc
> look much friendlier.
>
> I propose to adopt the current glibc code, and #if HAVE_TERMIOS_H and
> #if TCGETATTR protect it. If there are no objections, I'll propose a
> patch with
