From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 1 10:24:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3DAD037B401 for ; Thu, 1 May 2003 10:24:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.nectar.cc (gw.nectar.cc [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6522943FAF for ; Thu, 1 May 2003 10:24:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from nectar@celabo.org) Received: from madman.celabo.org (madman.celabo.org [10.0.1.111]) (using TLSv1 with cipher EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA (168/168 bits)) (Client CN "madman.celabo.org", Issuer "celabo.org CA" (verified OK)) by gw.nectar.cc (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DB75; Thu, 1 May 2003 12:24:14 -0500 (CDT) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 37A7C78C4A; Thu, 1 May 2003 12:24:14 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 12:24:14 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: "Andrey A. Chernov" Message-ID: <20030501172414.GA23285@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , "Andrey A. Chernov" , freebsd-arch@freebsd.org 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> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030501162529.GA56264@nagual.pp.ru> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i-ja.1 cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 01 May 2003 17:24:16 -0000 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