RFC: use of hidden_def/hidden_proto

Peter S. Mazinger ps.m at gmx.net
Sat Jan 7 11:17:54 UTC 2006


On Sat, 7 Jan 2006, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:

> On Fri, 6 Jan 2006, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> 
> > Benefits:
> 
> 8. If we would begin building completely separate objects for libc.so and 
> libc.a (w/ -DSHARED and w/o), we could omit the hidden versions from 
> libc.a (not needed there)
> 
> I am kindly asking those who do not like/object against these changes to 
> come up with proposals of handling __REDIRECT w/ the current 
> implementation. I do not have ideas how it can be acomplished and I won't 
> touch any func/func64 pairs, because the internal functionality of libc 
> will be a mess (if LFS is disabled there is no trouble, but else ...)
> 
> I also ask for support/ideas for cancelable syscalls (libc/libpthread 
> interaction)

Forgotten to mention, I also need ideas how to handle macros that call 
functions (__*getc_unlocked,__*putc_unlocked and friends) and their 
uppercase versions.

Thanks, Peter

-- 
Peter S. Mazinger <ps dot m at gmx dot net>           ID: 0xA5F059F2
Key fingerprint = 92A4 31E1 56BC 3D5A 2D08  BB6E C389 975E A5F0 59F2




More information about the uClibc mailing list