Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...)

Larry Rosenman wrote:
> >> > Woh, I thought we just agreed that getpwuid_r() isn't required for
> >> > thread-safety on your platform.
> >> it's CLEANER to use it.
> >>
> >> Our API Signature is the _r version, why not use it when it's available?
> >
> > My new patch will optionally use it if it exists, but we still need to
> > know if it is required so if we don't find it, we throw an error.
>
> On UnixWare, either should be thread-safe, to the best of my knowledge.
> HOWEVER,
> UnixWare has the getpwuid_r version, and since our API(from thread.c) is
> the _r signature,
> we should just return getpwuid_r(...,....,..., etc).

OK, I have marked Unixware as not requiring *_r functions. I decided
against optionally using the *_r functions if they exist because it
requires more tests/defines in configure.in, the standard changed the
arguments for some *_r functions over time (from drafts), and there is
no advantage if the libc versions are thread-safe already.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073