Some patches to please Debian 💯️ - #100
Conversation
…o be defined Co-authored-by: Thomas Debesse <dev@illwieckz.net>
6335972 to
b204b11
Compare
|
Hi, |
|
|
|
Bruh… is this 32 years old ? So did we found something in macOS that is even older than their bash from In comparison the FreeBSD man page: And the Linux man page: So both Linux and FreeBSD implement POSIX.1-2008, just FreeBSD doesn't mention that version, but describe the standardized behavior. I found this page: It says: Some people are even doubting that macOS is an Unix (Apple’s macOS UNIX certification is a lie):
Though half of the things (maybe more) to do to make it matches the certification, I wouldn't want them, and you must not do them (and that's would be too old, what we don't want). So if their Unix certification isn't one, what about their POSIX conformance ? Well, actually, if they do follow POSIX.1-2001 and no more, then, according to what said FreeBSD: “the behavior if resolved_path is NULL is implementation-defined.”. Damn, we're in BIG 2026 and macOS is still stuck on POSIX.1-2001??? That's not 1994, but that's still 25 years old… macOS brings so much pain, has painful ergonomy and is so painful to develop for… |
|
This is said to be a copy of macOS man page from macOS 10.12.0, as hosted by FreeBSD: It says: This copy of the macOS man page from macOS 26.5.2 says the same: In this Mozilla Bugzilla, someone named timeless says 16 years ago
|
|
Here is the man page copied straight from a macOS Tahoe, and it's dated from 2008, and it describes the behavior for POSIX 2008 (while not naming any standard): |
|
So it looks like the man page linked from the Apple website is obsolete. The |
|
LGTM |
The Debian package applies two patches by @twolife:
So we better have the fixes upstream and them not having to apply any patch.
The first patch, I totally rewrote it to be much more generic.
The second patch, I simply added the initialization of
*ptonullptrto the original patch.I reworded the commit messages in better ways.
For knowledge, the need for those patches were triggered by Debian Hurd… We don't support that, but the actual patches are generic clean-up and improvements that are always good to have. Especially it removes one
ifdeffor FreeBSD and makes the code use a more modern version ofrealpath().So in the end the code is in better shape and even has less system-specific branches: more portable with less branches.