Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2018 00:45:08 -0600 From: Kyle Evans <kevans@freebsd.org> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Yuri Pankov <yuripv@yuripv.net>, freebsd-hackers <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: is adding new private symbols to libc frowned upon? Message-ID: <CACNAnaFTGhWtS-LHa7_hpp1Q-9LYBZ2UbXN-1RcrboL1aGub6A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20181222064138.GM60291@kib.kiev.ua> References: <e120678a-359b-5131-3866-219d4c3cd796@yuripv.net> <20181222064138.GM60291@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 12:42 AM Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 22, 2018 at 04:38:52AM +0300, Yuri Pankov wrote: > > Essentially, I need the __collate_equiv_value symbol to be visible to > > libregex for the changes in https://reviews.freebsd.org/D18531. Is the > > following change OK (it works, at least), or should try to avoid that? > > > > --- a/lib/libc/locale/Symbol.map > > +++ b/lib/libc/locale/Symbol.map > > @@ -212,6 +212,7 @@ FBSD_1.3 { > > FBSDprivate_1.0 { > > _PathLocale; > > __detect_path_locale; > > + __collate_equiv_value; > > __collate_load_error; > > __collate_range_cmp; > > }; > > > Then libregex must always match the installed libc. > > I looked at the the libregex/Makefile and my question is, what is the > difference between exports from libc/regex vs. libregex. Can libregex > become ELF filter for libc ? > libregex is going to be getting more complicated [1] after a couple more exp-runs. I can possibly re-work it to make a filter work (perhaps?), but I'm not sure how badly that will impact the performance of libc regex. [1] https://reviews.freebsd.org/D12935
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CACNAnaFTGhWtS-LHa7_hpp1Q-9LYBZ2UbXN-1RcrboL1aGub6A>