`Hiding' libc symbols

[Jacques A. Vidrine]

On Tue, May 06, 2003 at 11:02:24AM -0700, Julian Elischer wrote:
> If you could do your census again but this time showing which symbols
> clash we would have a better idea of what we are talking about..

Uh, that is the list I posted.   Yes, that long list included clashing
symbols only.

> Probably most of these packages have these function 'in case' the system
> does not. 

It's a pretty good mix of those that do it `in case' and those that do
it for their own reasons.

> You can also bet that if compiled on Linux they don't include
> these functions if Linux has them, so I'm willing to bet that many of
> them have ways to turn off much of the excess stuff.

You would lose the bet.  These applications compile and run fine on
FreeBSD _now_, also.  Whether or not something in libc will change in
the future to break it is the question (as in the qpopper example).
Or maybe the `bad' code path hasn't yet been hit.

Cheers,
-- 
Jacques Vidrine   . NTT/Verio SME      . FreeBSD UNIX       . Heimdal
nectar at celabo.org . jvidrine at verio.net . nectar at freebsd.org . nectar at kth.se