From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/40
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: Cleanup patches
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 20:31:15 +0200
Message-ID: <20110606183115.GA5512@port70.net>
References: <60BABB60-7D9B-4D66-8645-4CDFD07E1338@palsenberg.com>
 <20110606171317.GN6142@port70.net>
 <20110606173210.GD191@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1307385103 28787 80.91.229.12 (6 Jun 2011 18:31:43 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2011 18:31:43 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-123-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Mon Jun 06 20:31:40 2011
Return-path: <musl-return-123-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by lo.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-123-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1QTeaQ-0006zl-4A
	for gllmg-musl@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 06 Jun 2011 20:31:38 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 7326 invoked by uid 550); 6 Jun 2011 18:31:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 7318 invoked from network); 6 Jun 2011 18:31:37 -0000
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20110606173210.GD191@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:40
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/40>

* Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> [2011-06-06 13:32:10 -0400]:
> On Mon, Jun 06, 2011 at 07:13:18PM +0200, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> >  %.o: $(ARCH)/%.s
> > -	$(CC) $(CFLAGS) $(INC) -c -o $@ $<
> > +	$(CC) -c -o $@ $<
> > 
> > this could be $(AS) -o $@ $<
> 
> Is there a reason this is necessary or beneficial?
> 
the c compiler may use different asm syntax than you do?
so $(AS) can be something that knows your .s syntax

> > and wcsspn arguments must be const qualified
> 
> This is wrong. A non-const-qualified pointer always implicitly
> converts to the const-qualified version.
> 
true

> > Subject: [PATCH 6/6] You can't weak alias a static function or variable
> > 
> > you can, at least gcc/ld allows it, it just does not make much sense
> 
> It does make sense to allow it, but I can see how it might be a little
> more work for the compiler and the compiler might not want to support
> it.
> 
what's the difference between
 static int f() { stuff(); }
 int g() __attribute__((weak, alias("f")));
and
 int g() { stuff(); }
?

in the later case local f calls must be replaced by g calls
but other than that is there a difference?