Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 18:22:32 +0200 From: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org> To: "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: `Hiding' libc symbols Message-ID: <xzp7k94gi47.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> In-Reply-To: <20030506155128.GB77956@madman.celabo.org> (Jacques A. Vidrine's message of "Tue, 6 May 2003 10:51:28 -0500") 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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org> writes: > 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 (b)... in case anyone cares :) DES -- Dag-Erling Smorgrav - des@ofug.org
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?xzp7k94gi47.fsf>