[PATCH] ash: avoid GLIBC'ism %m

[Johannes Schindelin]

Hi Denys,

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017, Denys Vlasenko wrote:

> On Sat, Jul 22, 2017 at 8:56 PM, Johannes Schindelin
> <Johannes.Schindelin at gmx.de> wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Jul 2017, Denys Vlasenko wrote:
> >
> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 3:47 AM, Jody Bruchon <jody at jodybruchon.com> wrote:
> >> > On 2017-07-18 9:15 PM, Kang-Che Sung wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Markus Gothe <nietzsche at lysator.liu.se>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Actually last time I checked ‘%m’ is POSIX contrary to glibc’s deprecated
> >> >>> '%a’. However, I agree that it should not be used since at least uClibc can
> >> >>> be built without support for it.
> >> >>
> >> >> How come %m is POSIX when I didn't see any mention of it in this page?
> >> >> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/fprintf.html
> >> >
> >> > It does not appear to be part of POSIX or the Single UNIX Specification. The
> >> > glibc man page (as of 2016-12-12) even indicates that it is a glibc-specific
> >> > extension:
> >> >
> >> > *m *(Glibc extension; supported by uClibc and musl.) Print output of
> >> > /strerror(errno)/. No argument is required.
> >>
> >> This sounds like every libc has already conceded to implementing it.
> >>
> >> Let's benefit from it then?
> >
> > No, not every libc. I would not have spent the time and effort to develop
> > the patch, contribute it, rework it and contribute a second iteration if
> > it was not for a good reason now, would I.
> 
> Good point.
> What libc is that?

MSVC runtime.

I see that Ron got a cleaner patch in already.

Thanks,
Johannes