Sub-Tickets selected for POSIX Compilance GSoc Project

[Vaibhav Gupta]

Ticket #2974 - Enable search.h functionality in newlib. :
https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2974
.
The following declarations are missing from
newlib-cygwin/newlib/libc/include/search.h:

void   insque(void *, void *);
void  *lfind(const void *, const void *, size_t *, size_t, int (*)(const
void *const void *));
void  *lsearch(const void *, void *, size_t *, size_t, int (*)(const void
*, const void *));
void   remque(void *);

This work can be added to POSIX Compilance for GSoC?

On Fri, Mar 22, 2019 at 12:35 AM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 9:05 AM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 6:10 PM Joel Sherrill <joel at rtems.org> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Mar 21, 2019, 2:43 AM Vaibhav Gupta <vaibhavgupta40 at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>> After series of discussions and exploring things, I got Idea about
>>>> various things in this project.
>>>> I have got Interested in following sub-tickets:
>>>> -- #2970 - Add ftw.h to Newlib : https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2970
>>>> -- #2971 - Add fenv.h to Newlib : https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2971
>>>> -- #2972 - Add ndbm.h support : https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2972
>>>> -- #3639 - Add fmtmsg.h to Newlib : https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3639
>>>> -- #3650 - Add sys/ipc.h to Newlib :
>>>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/3650
>>>>
>>>
>>> This should be low priority.
>>>
>>> -- #2973 - Enable getdate() in Newlib :
>>>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2973
>>>> -- #2974 - Enable search.h functionality in Newlib :
>>>> https://devel.rtems.org/ticket/2974
>>>> -- Requrement from FACE GPP :
>>>>
>>>>    - -- math functions:
>>>>    - fpclassify()
>>>>       - isfinite()
>>>>       - isgreater()
>>>>       - isgreaterequal()
>>>>       - isless()
>>>>       - islessequal()
>>>>       - islessgreater()
>>>>       - isnormal()
>>>>       - isunordered()
>>>>       - nexttowardf()
>>>>       - signbit()
>>>>
>>>>
>>> This is fenv.h and IMO is higher priority for architectures where you
>>> are porting existing implementations.
>>>
>> Yah, so during my SoC time I will start with them first.
>> I guess I may find them on FreeBSD, had a little search on net.
>> Will get deeper in the topic once the sub-tasks are confirmed,
>> as for now I am going through tickets for POSIX Compliance.
>>
>
> +1  Add them to rtems-libbsd
>
>
>>
>>>>
>>>>    - -- pselect() from <sys/select.h>
>>>>    - -- sockatmark() from <sys/socket.h>
>>>>
>>>> Sebastian.. are these not in the new tcpip stack?
>>>
>>> And agree with Sebastian on the *at methods.
>>>
>> That's great. I am ready to work on them.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>    - -- confstr() from <unistd.h>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>    - -- spawn function:
>>>>    - posix_spawn()
>>>>       - posix_spawn_file_actions_addclose()
>>>>       - posix_spawn_file_actions_adddup2()
>>>>       - posix_spawn_file_actions_addopen()
>>>>       - posix_spawn_file_actions_destroy()
>>>>       - posix_spawn_file_actions_init()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_destroy()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getflags()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getpgroup()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getschedparam()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getschedpolicy()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getsigdefault()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_getsigmask()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_init()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setflags()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setpgroup()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setschedparam()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setschedpolicy()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setsigdefault()
>>>>       - posix_spawnattr_setsigmask()
>>>>       - posix_spawnp(
>>>>
>>>> Spawn is a safer alternative to fork and exec. This requires
>>> multi-process support and thus these are not implementable on RTEMS.
>>>
>> Yah, i had this query in my mind, but then they were also not tagged as
>> POSIX_MULTI_PROCESS in FACE Technical Standards 3.0
>> and as you said about multi-process functions to be optional, i was not
>> able to conclude about them.
>> So I will leave it.
>>
>
> Good catch. The FACE ticket for allowing multiple processes to be optional
> missed _POSIX_SPAWN. Luckily it hasn't made a release and I was just
> addressing
> this earlier this week. So I need to correct the FACE ticket. :)
>
>>
>>> If there is an existing ticket, it needs to state this.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> If they all compile into a good GSoC project, I would like to start
>>>> writing a draft proposal.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Vaibhav Gupta
>>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.rtems.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20190323/06bd3576/attachment-0002.html>