On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 09:36 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
On (27/05/14 09:27), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 09:17 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> On (27/05/14 09:11), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>> >On Tue, 2014-05-27 at 00:19 +0200, Lukas Slebodnik wrote:
>> >> ehlo,
>> >>
>> >> strchrnul() and mempcpy() are GNU extensions to libc
>> >> This patch add configure time test for this functions and provide
>> >> custom implementation if functions are not available.
>> >>
>> >> patch is attached.
>> >>
>> >> LS
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> sssd-devel mailing list
>> >> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>> >>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>> >
>> >Hello Lukas,
>> >
>> >is it really necessary to have two definitions of
>> >mempcpy()?
>> Yes,
>>
>> libsss_crypt.so is built either with nss or with libcrypto.
>> Look into Makefile.am for details.
>>
>> LS
>> _______________________________________________
>> sssd-devel mailing list
>> sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
>>
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel
>
>Yes, I'm aware of that. I was just thinking if you could move the
>definition into separate file and thus avoid code duplication...
>
No, there will be no benefit.
There isn't any shared file between two implementation of libsss_crypt.
Well,
would it really be a bad idea to have one source file for whole
SSSD which would conditionally define these libc extensions?
static function can be easily inlined and I don't want to have
conditional
definition of function in header file.
Neither do I.
LS
_______________________________________________
sssd-devel mailing list
sssd-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/sssd-devel