[cmucl-imp] Re: setenv, unsetenv (Was Re: Re: EXT:GETENV Re: [cmucl-commit] CMUCL commit: src/code (save.lisp))

[Raymond Toy]

Madhu wrote:
> * Raymond Toy <4AD71250.90204 at stericsson.com> :
> Wrote on Thu, 15 Oct 2009 08:15:12 -0400:
>
> | Note that Solaris 8 (yes, it's ancient) does not have unsetenv and
> | setenv, so if we do this, can we try to just use putenv?  I guess that
> | precludes us from  removing something from the environment.
>
> If you cannot remove anything from the environment, I imagine you could
> just conditionalize out the unsetenv call branch without loss, maybe set
> it the value to "".  There are no current callers anyway.
>   
It would be nice if Solaris 10 could do this.  I guess we could have a
different version for Solaris which would catch the undefined function
error and do the right thing.  Doesn't need to be done now.
> | Solaris 10 does have unsetenv and setenv, though.
> |
> | And I think it is important to keep *environment-list* synchronized.
> | Either that or change load-foreign, execve, run-program and others
> | that use *environment-list* to set the environment.
>
> The idea behind what I suggested was to have minimal impact on existing
> code --- so the *environment-list* would continue to be used as before
> by these functions; it would continue to reflect the unix environment
> list at startup and have all changes made by the user via SETENV and
> (SETF GETENV).
>   
Yes, I agree with this approach.

Ray