[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAMKF1spErrUAaio7Zys_PWfCUmkoWpvg3n1S01AgbKKqTpd3vg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2023 18:18:07 -0800
From: Khem Raj <raj.khem@...il.com>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Cc: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>, Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] search: provide twalk_r()
On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 1:26 PM Bartosz Golaszewski <brgl@...ev.pl> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2023 at 10:16 PM Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 09, 2023 at 09:43:42PM +0100, Bartosz Golaszewski wrote:
> > > From: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> > >
> > > Provide a variant of twalk() that allows callers to pass custom user
> > > data to it without resorting to global variables.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Bartosz Golaszewski <bartosz.golaszewski@...aro.org>
> >
> > Is there any precedent for this other than glibc, with matching
> > signature and behavior? Without that, it looks like it's subject to
> > the potential for conflicting definitions.
> >
>
> Not sure what you mean. GLibc IS the precedent. This function has only
> been around since glibc 2.30 (well, it's been 3 years) and requires
> _GNU_SOURCE. It's a relatively new function but without it, twalk() is
> quite useless.
musl uses posix as its guiding light and sparingly implement other functions
>
> The background for this patch is: I have a low-level C library that I
> maintain for which I try to limit external dependencies and I used
> twalk_r() in the new version only to find out it doesn't build with
> musl.
maybe you should carry it as a fallback in your library and use it when building
on libraries which do not provide it as a fall back.
>
> Bart
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.
