Re: [PATCH v8 32/41] environment: add set_index_file()

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Fri, Jul 29, 2016 at 5:34 PM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Yeah. If the libification movement is going strong, we can start
> converting and at some point should be able to define
> NO_THE_INDEX_COMPATIBILITY_MACROS globally (and avoid the_index along
> the way)
>
> Without that, there is a risk. I looked at 'nm apply.o | grep ' [Uu]
> '' and I don't see any external functions that would potentially
> access the index, except ll_merge. Again there's a good chance I may
> have missed something.
>
>> So it looks like it is a very big and different project to make the
>> current libified code be explicit about which index it is using.
>> And by the way perhaps this other project should just remove the
>> "the_index" global altogether.
>
> This is probably the way to go. But it's the boring sort of work that
> nobody wants to do :(

Do you mean that it might be a source of micro-projects for the next
GSoC or Outreachy? ;-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]