On Tue 18 Mar 2014 23:12:45 Mike Frysinger wrote: > maybe we just ignore the issue since fts.h is dead anyways ? just add a > section to the fts(3) page recommending people use ftw(3) instead ? i might be completely off on fts vs ftw. there's discussion on glibc lists about maybe fixing fts to not suck. perhaps we just link to the existing bug on the topic ? https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11460 -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
