Re: [fetchmail-devel] Re: r3995 - trunk

[Brian C. <B.C...@po...>]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2004 at 12:41:12AM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2004 at 11:54:51PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote:
> > Graham Wilson <gr...@mk...> writes:
> > > Why do we want it as a separate project?
> > 
> > Ripping code out of other software is harder to track WRT updates.
> 
> I'm not really concerned as much about updates to an snprintf
> implementation; I wouldn't think there would need to be much updating.
> I'm more concerned with adding a whole other project into the fetchmail
> tarball.

What do other projects do with regard to snprintf or lack of it? How many
Unix systems lack snprintf these days?

According to the FreeBSD manpage,

     the snprintf() and vsnprintf()
     functions conform to ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (`ISO C99'').

Would it be reasonable simply to expect a decent O/S to have these functions
now? I don't know if SunOS 4.1 has snprintf or not, but if it doesn't and
you're still running it, you'll have worse problems than not being able to
compile fetchmail.

If there is a free-standing external snprintf library, then we could just
point people at it and tell them to install it first if it's needed.

Regards,

Brian.