[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160312153059.GB9349@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 10:30:59 -0500
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add `intl` to EMPTY_LIB_NAMES.
On Fri, Mar 11, 2016 at 04:13:31PM +0900, Masanori Ogino wrote:
> Now I got them thanks to Google:
>
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/04/16/1
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/04/16/2
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/04/16/3
> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/04/16/4
> http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?46436
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gettext/2015-11/msg00015.html
>
> >From the last link:
> > According to the post linked from the above, the check seems to be there
> > to exclude incompatible implementations of gettext(), like Solaris 7 and
> > NetBSD:
> > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-utils/2006-03/msg00011.html
> >
> > If musl's gettext implementation is compatible with GNU gettext, I guess
> > we could adjust the check to accept it. However, I have no idea which
> > symbols or macros can be used for the check. It would be helpful if
> > musl people could chime in and give us a hint.
The right fix is to change the logic from
"If we find glibc-internal symbols"
to:
"If the public API symbols are there and this isn't Solaris or
whatever other system has a broken gettext"
I don't know if they are willing to make such a change.
Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
