This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [PATCH] Replacing gcc's dependence on libiberty's fnmatch to gnulib's fnmatch

On 26 July 2016 at 3:38:59 AM, Manuel López-Ibáñez
( wrote:
> On 25 July 2016 at 18:18, ayush goel wrote:
> > On top of the previously filed patch for importing gnulib (the link
> > isn’t available on the archive yet, however this contains some of the
> > information:
> > now I have replaced another function from libiberty with the
> > corresponding version from gnulib.
> > Even though in both OSX and GNU/Linux, fnmatch is provided by the GNU
> > libc already, so the copy in libiberty is not used in your systems.
> > However since the objective is to replace whatever functions can be
> > leveraged by gnulib, these changes have been made.
> Why the change from "fnmatch.h" to ?

Gnulib doesn’t contain a header for fnmatch. It itself relies on
glib’c fnmatch.h

> Also, are the files in gnulib and libiberty semantically identical?
> The wiki page does not say anything about this. How did you check
> this?

Well the online docs for libiberty and gnulib claim the same
definition for fnmatch. Apart from this I’ve manually gone through the
source code and they seem to be semantically similar.
Also the fact that the system builds fine and the tests also execute
fine could serve as a manifestation for the fact that they are
semantically same.
> GCC can run on other systems besides OSX and GNU/Linux, how can you
> test that your change does not break anything on those systems?
Well I have access to these two systems only. How would you suggest I
test my patches on all possible systems?

> Cheers,
> Manuel.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]