Re: pidfile
On Mon, Sep 27, 2004 at 02:53:26PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote:
>
> :Fixed the mixup with pidfile that was preventing kerberos5 from being
> :built after pidfile() was added to libutil. This could probably be done
> :right by redoing configure with the later libutil; configure does look
> :at this. However, I don't know the canonical method, other than just by
> :hand, of getting from autoconf contrib packages to the bmake system...
I'll fix that, thanks.
> :
> :Does noone else use kerberos? I've seen no complaints.
Doesn't seems so :)
> :
> :-- Pete
>
> Maybe we should rename pidfile() in libutil to something else
> instead. It's a pretty aweful name for libutil to choose to use
> anyway! Maybe something like make_pidfile() ? Comments? From
> what I can tell there isn't much in our tree that actually uses it.
It isn't used for now, but we can replace a lot of the handrolled
implemenations in base with it. I think keeping the name compatible
with NetBSD is better in this instance.
Joerg
> -Matt
討論串 (同標題文章)