Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 23:32:23 +0100 From: Mark Wielaard <mark@...mp.org> To: Max Rees <maxcrees@...com>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: elfutils-devel@...rceware.org, Érico Rolim <erico.erc@...il.com> Subject: Re: Re: [QUESTION] Which fnmatch() functionality does elfutils depend on? Hi Max, On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 13:54 -0400, Max Rees via Elfutils-devel wrote: > On Mon Oct 26 01:28 PM, Érico Nogueira wrote: > > On Mon Oct 26, 2020 at 3:10 PM -03, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > > On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 12:03 -0300, Érico Nogueira via Elfutils- > > > devel > > > wrote: > > > > Do elfutils program actually depend on the extra functionality > > > > enabled by > > > > FNM_EXTMATCH? Is changing the flag to have no effect a "bug"? > > > > > > Yes. The extended wildcard pattern is relied upon by both > > > eu-strip with > > > > > > --keep-section=SECTION Keep the named section. SECTION is an > > > extended wildcard pattern. May be given > > > more than once. > > > > > > and eu-elfcompress with > > > > > > -n, --name=SECTION SECTION name to (de)compress, SECTION is an > > > extended wildcard pattern (defaults to > > > '.?(z)debug*') > > > > > > In the eu-strip case it might be reasoned that instead of a > > > wildcard pattern the user might most of the time simply provide > > > a section name as is (especially since the option may be given > > > multiple times). But in the case of eu-elfcompress the > > > program relies on the default SECTION name being an extended > > > wildcard pattern. So not supporting FNM_EXTMATCH breaks the > > > default functionality of eu-elfcompress. > > > > Understood, thank you. I'm replying to the musl mailing list as well, > > then, to hopefully gather more opinions, since I don't know what the > > best way of solving this would be. > > When I was working on porting elfutils to Adélie (kind of on the > backburner right now) I noticed this problem as well. Rather than try to > add FNM_EXTMATCH support to musl, I worked around it in elfutils in this > manner. > > 1. I changed the default like so: > > - add_pattern (".?(z)debug*"); > + add_pattern (".debug*"); > + add_pattern (".zdebug*"); > > 2. I updated the corresponding help text to mention this new default. > > The user could do something similar themselves with multiple "-n" > options. That is a workaround to get a working build if your libc currently doesn't provide a working fnmatch with FNM_EXTMATCH. But it would still break the interface of the tools that currently accept an extended wildcard pattern. So I think the best way forward is adding FNM_EXTMATCH support to those libcs that don't support it yet (and maybe get it standardized). Cheers, Mark
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.