From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1374 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/10] GLIBC ABI patches Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 13:35:24 -0400 Message-ID: <20120725173524.GS544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20120722181332.191d4fa5@newbook> <20120722183828.20b71c9d@newbook> <500FFEEB.9030004@gentoo.org> <20120725151909.GR544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <5010164E.9080403@gentoo.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1343237745 6233 80.91.229.3 (25 Jul 2012 17:35:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 17:35:45 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1375-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jul 25 19:35:45 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Su5Us-0001g2-B2 for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 25 Jul 2012 19:35:42 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 27831 invoked by uid 550); 25 Jul 2012 17:35:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 27823 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2012 17:35:40 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5010164E.9080403@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1374 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 05:52:46PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: > > I think the idea is that we might want to use __strndup internally in > > functions which can't expose the strndup name. However, as we haven't > > yet had a need for that, I suspect it's unlikely. Also, __strndup > > isn't really an ugly name (it makes sense as the "internal" name for > > strndup if such usage were needed), but __isoc99_scanf is a huge WTF > > unless you know the reason it exists in glibc (and then it just makes > > you hate glibc even more...). > > Would be nice make all those alias consistent, might be interesting see > if linker scripts could be use for similar purposes, keeping the core > code cleaner. Considering that the linker is never run on the static library that would be rather difficult. Even if it were possible, I think it would just subtract a trivial amount of cruft that's easy to ignore from the .c files at the expense of making the build system much uglier and more GNU-binutils-dependent. If lots of people think it's confusing having a mix of aliases that are for internal/legitimate purposes and for ugly ABI purposes, I either add comments to all the ABI-only ones that they can be ignored by somebody reading the source, or I could do something like the LFS64 macros and have a separate macro for the ABI-only aliases that would be self-documenting of their purpose and that could be nulled out by extremists who want them gone... Rich