ABI compatibility for gconv modules

[Rich Felker]

On Fri, Aug 08, 2014 at 09:52:27AM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Fri 08 Aug 2014 12:04:56 Florian Weimer wrote:
> > Do we need to preserve ABI for gconv modules, or are they totally
> > internal to libc and we can break the interface as we see fit?
> 
> considering the warning that is issued when you link statically, i'd say the 
> policy has been that the ABI is private to glibc.  especially since you can't 
> really link directly against them, and you shouldn't be dlopening them 
> directly.
> 
> i'm not saying i'd be in favor of making the static situation saner, but i 
> don't think locking the gconv ABI is the answer.

I would be in favor of just deprecating gconv modules, unless there's
a strong argument for keeping them. There are much simpler methods of
doing conversions using simple mmappable tables that are
static-linking friendly, avoid ugly ABI issues, and of course more
importantly, avoid security issues.

Rich