3 Oct
2014
3 Oct
'14
2:34 p.m.
On Friday 2014-10-03 14:20, Peter Stuge wrote:
Because someone placed -ltalloc into libosmocore_la_LIBADD, the result
of satisfying the calls to talloc that the osmocore code is sprinkled
with. IOW, osmocore provides no alternative paths to using talloc.
Yes, because system talloc has a
#define talloc_free(ctx) _talloc_free(ctx, __location__)
and otherwise, one gets "implicit definition of talloc_free" and
"undefined reference to `talloc_free'".
Dude, that is a kludge at a callsite, as opposed to a proper
dependency fix. Try again.
Well, enlighten us, mr-know-it-all.
Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Why don't you look into fixing that
Why should I? Why can't you?
* Firmware
builds with no talloc
That may be the use case, but it is not what was implemented. If you build
0.7.0 [336915aa0a] with --disable-talloc, `ldd
src/.libs/libosmocore.so` will show libtalloc.so.2.
Do you want to investigate why? +++
b/tests/msgfile/msgfile_test.c
@@ -20,6 +20,7 @@
*/
#include <osmocom/core/msgfile.h>
+#include <osmocom/core/talloc.h>
Is this hunk needed?