Re: [PATCH] rand.c updates from FreeBSD RELENG_5
William M. Grim wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I know there is the random(3) function, which is much better at
> randomness than rand(3); however, rand(3) is ISO C, whereas random(3) is
> not, as far as I know. Plus, many students and others tend to use
> rand(3) because its taught.
>
> The FreeBSD team has already made some updates to rand.c; so, I did not
> need to do much to port it to DragonFly in the form of an update that
> generates some better randomness.
>
> I have included the patch, but to see what I mean about the current
> rand(3) not being great, try this code (yes, I know, the seeding could
> have been done better):
>
> --- rand.c.orig 2004-05-11 01:34:30.000000000 -0500
> +++ rand.c 2004-05-12 05:50:54.000000000 -0500
> @@ -31,15 +31,18 @@
> * SUCH DAMAGE.
> *
> * Posix rand_r function added May 1999 by Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>.
> - *
> - * $FreeBSD: src/lib/libc/stdlib/rand.c,v 1.2.2.1 2001/03/05 11:33:57 obrien Exp $
> - * $DragonFly: src/lib/libc/stdlib/rand.c,v 1.2 2003/06/17 04:26:46 dillon Exp $
> - *
> - * @(#)rand.c 8.1 (Berkeley) 6/14/93
> */
You need to put those back in, the policy in place is to
update the $FreeBSD$ (or any vendor CVS Id tag) with the
version in place from the repository. So, if I was to
update rand.c with version 1.2.2.10, I would update the Id
tag accordingly. You also need to put back the $DragonFly$
tag.
The manual pages need to be updated accordingly with the
new function(s) that are added (i.e. sranddev etc).
Cheers.
-Hiten
hmp@backplane.com
討論串 (同標題文章)
完整討論串 (本文為第 3 之 18 篇)：