This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the elfutils project.
Re: [PATCH] Check for existence of mempcpy
- From: Ulf Hermann <ulf dot hermann at qt dot io>
- To: Mark Wielaard <mjw at redhat dot com>
- Cc: elfutils-devel at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2017 10:50:32 +0100
- Subject: Re: [PATCH] Check for existence of mempcpy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- Authentication-results: spf=none (sender IP is ) smtp.mailfrom=ulf dot hermann at qt dot io;
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=qtcompany.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector1-qt-io; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version; bh=Qrx5VyKS2mbAI+GMZkABIS9Bbrmr7JddnRJ0lTVVGR8=; b=bTByT9aiKuiO+njz9J7JrFLYzpTgrWkKOvNnR3V1hUyEhnt9gdZ5aGuhw8TZwacsDWU1Rfz0kYSr4aJrHxguRmeqhpoRkjYGm826lmDbveLtZYcftanW7/5X5NVZP/cEam4bfMNwxxPqemCFFJtYMR63jcq0rBPsXsYyd+LHflw=
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Spamdiagnosticmetadata: NSPM
- Spamdiagnosticoutput: 1:99
On 02/17/2017 10:46 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Thu, 2017-02-16 at 10:10 +0100, Ulf Hermann wrote:
>> If it doesn't exist, provide a definition based on memcpy.
> Applied, but slightly reluctantly. I have no way to test this. And it
> will evaluate the last argument (n) twice. Which seems to not matter in
> the current calls in our codebase. But it might subtly break something
> if someone forgets.
True. With other missing functions I tend to conditionally build the replacements into libeu.a as actual functions. That requires libeu.a to be linked into libdw.so, libelf.so, etc. I will create a followup patch that does the same with mempcpy.