Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 02:50:21 +0400 From: "Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru> To: Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com> Cc: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols Message-ID: <20030505225021.GA43345@nagual.pp.ru> In-Reply-To: <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305051806320.1374-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com> References: <20030505214605.GA41803@nagual.pp.ru> <Pine.GSO.4.10.10305051806320.1374-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 18:14:45 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote: > symbols in order to satisfy the needs of the threads library > and to separate libc_r from libc, I would kindly suggest that > you leave things alone. But if want to change things, please > make sure they work with all the threads libraries that we > currently have. I don't want the burden of doing this nor > have it impact our current efforts. Please calm down, I don't want to break threads badly or anything like. Especially when I don't understands threads details. At this stage we just discuss here how to make things better. My point will be clear answering on this simple question: What produce less errors in application and libraries? a) Allow application to replace any standard function. b) Produce linker error on such attempts. Please also note that I not treat functions like err(), warn() etc. as standard, so namespace.h is right for them.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030505225021.GA43345>