Re: [PATCH] rand.c updates from FreeBSD RELENG_5

[Hiten Pandya <hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

William M. Grim wrote:

> Hi.
>
> I know there is the random(3) function, which is much better at 
> randomness than rand(3); however, rand(3) is ISO C, whereas random(3) is 
> not, as far as I know.  Plus, many students and others tend to use 
> rand(3) because its taught.
>
> The FreeBSD team has already made some updates to rand.c; so, I did not 
> need to do much to port it to DragonFly in the form of an update that 
> generates some better randomness.
>
> I have included the patch, but to see what I mean about the current 
> rand(3) not being great, try this code (yes, I know, the seeding could 
> have been done better):
>
> --- rand.c.orig	2004-05-11 01:34:30.000000000 -0500
> +++ rand.c	2004-05-12 05:50:54.000000000 -0500
> @@ -31,15 +31,18 @@
>   * SUCH DAMAGE.
>   *
>   * Posix rand_r function added May 1999 by Wes Peters <wes@xxxxxxxxxxxx>.
> - *
> - * $FreeBSD: src/lib/libc/stdlib/rand.c,v 1.2.2.1 2001/03/05 11:33:57 obrien Exp $
> - * $DragonFly: src/lib/libc/stdlib/rand.c,v 1.2 2003/06/17 04:26:46 dillon Exp $
> - *
> - * @(#)rand.c	8.1 (Berkeley) 6/14/93
>   */

	You need to put those back in, the policy in place is to
	update the $FreeBSD$ (or any vendor CVS Id tag) with the
	version in place from the repository.  So, if I was to
	update rand.c with version 1.2.2.10, I would update the Id
	tag accordingly.  You also need to put back the $DragonFly$
	tag.

	The manual pages need to be updated accordingly with the
	new function(s) that are added (i.e. sranddev etc).

	Cheers.

		-Hiten
		hmp@xxxxxxxxxxxxx