3 Oct
2014
3 Oct
'14
10:56 p.m.
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:42:55PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
Dear Jan, Peter,
Nobody is arguing about that. We should not even have a bundled
copy of talloc.c. The reason we have one is historic (IIRC there
were certainly no -dev/devel packages in any distribution back
then and I am not sure if talloc.c even existed outside the samba
code).
I do appreciate your work to help us move to using the system
version of libtalloc. So let's all calm down.
Because you
seem to be working with this part of the code now and you
might as well do a thorough job if you're spending time on it.
I am not going to sprinkle osmocore with defines or otherwise make
talloc pluggable/replaceable by some other set of allocation
functions. I came to fix the problem I have an interest in, and that
is making osmocore support a system talloc in lieu or in addition to
a bundled talloc (->
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:No_Bundled_Libraries),
exercising standard diliegence, which includes that previously
supported cases continue to function to the best of observation. >> >> >Is this hunk needed?
>> >> Yes, because system talloc has a
>> >> #define talloc_free(ctx) _talloc_free(ctx, __location__)
>> >> and otherwise, one gets "implicit definition of talloc_free"
and
okay, I see the compiler warning now and will fix it.
cheers
holger