From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-ed1-x52f.google.com (mail-ed1-x52f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::52f]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74C473858408 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:55:24 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org 74C473858408 Received: by mail-ed1-x52f.google.com with SMTP id w15so39093730edc.9 for ; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 06:55:24 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=wPMpf/v+GQEdtJ4v0im5OPSlxsRrjiiCKA2oJgDao4c=; b=q+owCe8f/PflV49Q4hUK1OjN/rIb3/sgBHvvU/dcUHDVEwNBEwEEhxvW4owWP4W5bR tr2yJqZX/xTGHt7Z92T+se8JhMWmYgyj/CSN4I83TOJc5mdVXaLzR0tLYdHqXrBRDFQt XUFsq2cQS4jXbV4FLVWGKlwCd/qR2aYFCwoYjoUYzyNwwtVAoDQE6YSEJu50VjkARxer SQL3DyN68GRQz+Qb16xXuTxB/q4XIMzMG7JmvYIzdxKIFogz5afrO6GSNlsNa77IQdYs 4tnMocS2p+T07UX24WFdvbKNVCOR5qyezMfu3tL+i7JjPRMd50aITrI28/rzQZWLe8GE u4hw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM53221d6Q8eXMojRNjv2zq8xtVh8uHyoTa5UkCJwghB02d7hTCvTD ZTIf+2OHtmXM9yaR/wSNEHqgJC1CSqBR/6aY/3c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw5CO+YTNZ3UDxLzowrvu0npcyZ/RKaL2AjURWYs/N7DR5ksO8lZVaC02wMPI5yJ286EWuFmxwTQ8xha1a7KQ8= X-Received: by 2002:a17:907:628f:: with SMTP id nd15mr14048416ejc.389.1635515723540; Fri, 29 Oct 2021 06:55:23 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <73ac38a2-c287-4cc1-4e9c-0f9766ac4c0c@gmail.com> <00d501d7ccbe$0169c340$043d49c0$@nexbridge.com> In-Reply-To: <00d501d7ccbe$0169c340$043d49c0$@nexbridge.com> From: Eugene Syromyatnikov Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 15:55:07 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Is getpass(3) really obsolete? To: rsbecker@nexbridge.com Cc: "Alejandro Colomar (man-pages)" , Libc-alpha , linux-man , git@vger.kernel.org, tech@openbsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP, URI_DOTEDU autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 13:55:26 -0000 On Fri, Oct 29, 2021 at 2:40 PM wrote: > getpass() is obsolete in POSIX.2. However, some platforms still are on PO= SIX.1, so replacing it instead of providing a configure detection/switch fo= r it might cause issues. POSIX.2 is not a newer POSIX version, but rather a book (=E2=80=9CShell and utilities=E2=80=9D) in pre-2001 standard revisions, and it has nothing to d= o with the system interfaces (that is POSIX.1). And the only mention of getpass() in POSIX (at least, since the 2001's edition) indeed seems to be [1], in the list of functions that have not been carried forward from XSH5, the 1997 revision of =E2=80=9CSystem Interfaces and Headers=E2=80=9D (that is, SUSv2)[2], where it is inherited from SUSv1[4] from XPG[5] and, as Alejandro already mentioned, marked as obsolete, per XPG3 to XPG4 migration guide[6]; the previous, 1988, version of POSIX[3] does not mention getpass() at all. [1] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/xbd_chap01.htm= l [2] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/7908799/xsh/getpass.html [3] https://mirror.math.princeton.edu/pub/oldlinux/download/c953.pdf [4] https://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9695969499/toc.pdf [5] https://bitsavers.computerhistory.org/pdf/xOpen/X_Open_Portability_Guid= e_1985/xpg_2_xopen_system_v_specification_2.pdf [6] http://archive.opengroup.org/publications/archive/CDROM/g501.pdf --=20 Eugene Syromyatnikov mailto:evgsyr@gmail.com xmpp:esyr@jabber.{ru|org}