From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Mon May 5 10:54:29 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 9D18237B401 for ; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:54:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gw.nectar.cc (gw.nectar.cc [208.42.49.153]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB15743FA3 for ; Mon, 5 May 2003 10:54:28 -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 6355626 for ; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:54:28 -0500 (CDT) Received: by madman.celabo.org (Postfix, from userid 1001) id 17AFB78C69; Mon, 5 May 2003 12:54:28 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 5 May 2003 12:54:28 -0500 From: "Jacques A. Vidrine" To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org Message-ID: <20030505175428.GA19275@madman.celabo.org> Mail-Followup-To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" , freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org References: <20030501182820.GA53641@madman.celabo.org> <20030503201409.GA41554@dragon.nuxi.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030503201409.GA41554@dragon.nuxi.com> X-Url: http://www.celabo.org/ User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i-ja.1 Subject: Re: 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: Mon, 05 May 2003 17:54:29 -0000 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