`Hiding' libc symbols

[Daniel Eischen]

On Tue, 6 May 2003, Andrey A. Chernov wrote:

> On Mon, May 05, 2003 at 18:14:45 -0400, Daniel Eischen wrote:
> > symbols in order to satisfy the needs of the threads library
> > and to separate libc_r from libc, I would kindly suggest that
> > you leave things alone.  But if want to change things, please
> > make sure they work with all the threads libraries that we
> > currently have.  I don't want the burden of doing this nor
> > have it impact our current efforts.
> 
> Please calm down, I don't want to break threads badly or anything like.  

Don't worry, I'm calm :-)

> Especially when I don't understands threads details. At this stage we just
> discuss here how to make things better. My point will be clear answering
> on this simple question:
> 
> What produce less errors in application and libraries?
> a) Allow application to replace any standard function.

I thought Jacques found lots of ports that replaced standard
functions...

> b) Produce linker error on such attempts.

If there are a lot of applications that override printf()
and the like, you might get lots of complaints about the
new link warnings...

> Please also note that I not treat functions like err(), warn() etc. as 
> standard, so namespace.h is right for them.

OK.

-- 
Dan Eischen