Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:24:14 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols Message-ID: <20030501172414.GA23285@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <20030501162529.GA56264@nagual.pp.ru> References: <20030501140255.GB1869@survey.codeburst.net> <20030501143032.GA34163@madman.celabo.org> <20030501144600.GC1869@survey.codeburst.net> <20030501145345.GA34884@madman.celabo.org> <20030501151458.GA54182@nagual.pp.ru> <20030501152251.GB34992@madman.celabo.org> <20030501155342.GA55078@nagual.pp.ru> <20030501160119.GB35367@madman.celabo.org> <20030501160944.GC55078@nagual.pp.ru> <20030501162529.GA56264@nagual.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 08:25:29PM +0400, Andrey A. Chernov wrote: > Just to note: we already have this precedent happens with strcasestr() > function, not covered by standards. Some ports define their own > strcasestr(). We decide to fix ports instead of libc hacking. > > And now we have two different ways of handling that case, one for > strcasestr() and another for strlcat(). Where is logic? It is clear from this thread that many people did not know about this option (namespace.h) for resolving such issues. Andrey, I've no disagreement with you that there could be a better way. Until such a better way appears, I think that the namespace.h technique can continue to be used. I will support you or anyone else 100% in introducing a better mechanism. Cheers, -- Jacques Vidrine . NTT/Verio SME . FreeBSD UNIX . Heimdal nectar@celabo.org . jvidrine@verio.net . nectar@freebsd.org . nectar@kth.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030501172414.GA23285>