[SSSD] [PATCH] Use custom implementation of glibc extension

Lukas Slebodnik lslebodn at redhat.com
Tue May 27 08:24:39 UTC 2014


On (27/05/14 10:08), Pavel Reichl wrote:
>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 at 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 at 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?
In this case, functions could not be static.

LS



More information about the sssd-devel mailing list