Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 12:54:28 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols Message-ID: <20030505175428.GA19275@madman.celabo.org> In-Reply-To: <20030503201409.GA41554@dragon.nuxi.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0305011046140.73226-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <XFMail.20030501140549.jhb@FreeBSD.org> <20030501182820.GA53641@madman.celabo.org> <20030503201409.GA41554@dragon.nuxi.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, May 03, 2003 at 01:14:09PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote: > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 01:28:20PM -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote: > > A lot of folks are focused on qpopper and strlcpy. I believe that > > the big picture is being missed. I moved this thread to freebsd-arch > > so that we could discuss how to hide all (or most, or non-standard) > > symbols in libc. Not so that we could argue about this particular > > commit. > > Perhaps you and a contentent of the rest are looking at different > pictures. In the our big picture, we don't want this being done to most > of libc. You don't want /what/ being done to most of libc? (No, really, I'm not sure what you mean.) > > I'm backing out the commit in good faith and in the hopes that the > > big picture comes more clearly into focus. > > Thanks. Do you also want to `fix' the other ports that define their own strlcpy? cyrus-imapd-2.0.17 cyrus-imapd-2.1.12 cyrus-imspd-v1.6a3 gnapster-1.5.0 hotwayd-0.51 isakmpd-20021118 openssh-3.5 snort-1.9.0 totd-1.3_3 xpilot-4.5.3 Probably others. What about the hundreds of other ports that also define symbols that we use from within libc? 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?20030505175428.GA19275>