From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Apr 29 21:27:26 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 19B1537B401; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:27:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.pcnet.com (mail.pcnet.com [204.213.232.4])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0048D43FBD; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 21:27:25 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com)
Received: from pcnet1.pcnet.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by mail.pcnet.com (8.12.8/8.12.1) with ESMTP id h3U4RNBg002752;
	Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:27:24 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (eischen@localhost)h3U4RMuD002725;
	Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:27:22 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 00:27:22 -0400 (EDT)
From: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
To: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-src@FreeBSD.org,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
In-Reply-To: <20030430002014.GA1190@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10304300024280.1846-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: Jacques Vidrine <nectar@FreeBSD.org>
cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/lib/libc/gen check_utility_compat.c confstr.c
 un-namespace.hgethostbydns.c getnameinfo.c hesiod.c ...
X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree <cvs-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-all>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-all>,
	<mailto:cvs-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2003 04:27:26 -0000

On Tue, 29 Apr 2003, David O'Brien wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 29, 2003 at 11:49:09PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Jacques Vidrine <nectar@FreeBSD.org> writes:
> > >   Log:
> > >   `Hide' strlcpy and strlcat (using the namespace.h / __weak_reference
> > >   technique) so that we don't wind up calling into an application's
> > >   version if the application defines them.
> > 
> > We should probably do this for every libc function that is used within
> > libc...
> 
> No we shouldn't.  If I understand you correctly, it prevents me from
> linking in my own malloc()/free() and having the entire system use it.
> Being able to replace the use of a libc function for *all* running of a
> program is a very useful thing.

Why can't you still do this?  You just have to know the real
name of the function you want to override.  Is malloc any
different than _malloc, so that you can't supply your own
with the correct symbol?

-- 
Dan Eischen