Adam Tkac wrote: > with https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=441429 this problem > became serious. We have two DNS resolver related libraries - libbind > from ISC on the one side and on the other side libc + libresolv from > GNU libc. Both libraries contains same symbols, does same work but > GNU libc implementation hides some symbols whose are sometimes needed > and this is reason why people linking against libbind (GNU libc is > stripped libbind source). Bug written above is one example that this > situation has to be solved. When program is linked against NSS and > also against libbind for example (because glibc doesn't provide such > interfaces) all gets broken because both libraries have same symbols > but uses different structures. Best fix is agreement between ISC and > GNU libc upstreams who will use that symbols and who will rename them. > I know this is only dream and it will take very long time (I'm sure > ISC will never change libbind and change in glibc is also nearly > impossible). So there are two ways how solve this problem - make > needed symbols from glibc public and don't link anything against > libbind or drop resolving support from libc and link all against > libbind. I vote for libbind as default resolver library because > maintenance cost of unsupported code in glibc downstream is bigger > than cost of stripped version of glibc. Any hints and ideas around > this problem are welcomed. What's your opinion? What does libbind do that libresolv doesn't? In other words, why would an application writer prefer to link against libbind? Andrew. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
