From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue May  6 09:46:02 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 295B337B401; Tue,  6 May 2003 09:46:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (trang.nuxi.com [66.93.134.19])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 550C243F75; Tue,  6 May 2003 09:46:01 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from obrien@NUXI.com)
Received: from dragon.nuxi.com (obrien@localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h46GjYm2037063;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 09:45:38 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from obrien@dragon.nuxi.com)
Received: (from obrien@localhost)
	by dragon.nuxi.com (8.12.9/8.12.9/Submit) id h46GjYT5037062;
	Tue, 6 May 2003 09:45:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Tue, 6 May 2003 09:45:34 -0700
From: "David O'Brien" <freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org>
To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>,
	Ben Mesander <ben@timing.com>,
	Daniel Eischen <eischen@pcnet1.pcnet.com>,
	"Andrey A. Chernov" <ache@nagual.pp.ru>,
	Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
Message-ID: <20030506164534.GB36798@dragon.nuxi.com>
References: <20030505225021.GA43345@nagual.pp.ru>
	<Pine.GSO.4.10.10305051855570.10283-100000@pcnet1.pcnet.com>
	<16055.55244.458061.779430@piglet.timing.com>
	<20030506155128.GB77956@madman.celabo.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20030506155128.GB77956@madman.celabo.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 5.0-CURRENT
Organization: The NUXI BSD Group
X-Pgp-Rsa-Fingerprint: B7 4D 3E E9 11 39 5F A3  90 76 5D 69 58 D9 98 7A
X-Pgp-Rsa-Keyid: 1024/34F9F9D5
Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.org
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture
	<freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 16:46:02 -0000

On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 10:51:28AM -0500, Jacques A. Vidrine wrote:
> On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 09:42:04AM -0600, Ben Mesander wrote:
> > In addition to ports which override libc functions like printf() for
> > ease of porting, there are important ports, such as the Boehm garbage
> > collector for C/C++ or electric fence, which _depend_ upon the ability
> > to override libc functions such as malloc() and free().
> > 
> > Whatever decision is eventually made must allow such ports to
> > function.
> > 
> > This has been brought up once before, but I do not see how any of the
> > advocates for change have addressed it.
> 
> Probably because there is not much to address.  I think it is
> universally agreed that the allocator is likely to need to be
> overridden.  There are at least two solutions:
> 
>   (a) Treat malloc & company as an exception: always call them by
>       their un-adorned name from within libc.
> 
>   (b) Let these specialized applications override the adorned names
>       instead.  There is probably already code within these ports to
>       deal with underscore-prefixed names.
> 
> I don't really have a preference for either solution.

I have a strong preference for (c) Do nothing.
(a)'s over time we'll just add to (a)'s list, so the exceptions are just
too ad-hoc.