On Mon, Jul 1, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Daniel Shahaf <danie...@elego.de> wrote:
> stef...@apache.org wrote on Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 18:46:54 -0000: > > Author: stefan2 > > Date: Sun Jun 30 18:46:53 2013 > > New Revision: 1498169 > > > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1498169 > > Log: > > On the fsfs-format7 branch: fix a linker issue with the new fsx backend. > > Give all non-static function a 'svn_fs_x__' prefix. Update callers > > > > I think that's a "workaround", not a "fix". > > The problem was that some functions were declared (and defined) in both > libsvn_fs_x and libsvn_fs_fs, with the same name, same signature, and > without a 'static' modifier in either case (since those functions were > intended to be library-scope). > > Your change *avoids* the problem, but it doesn't *fix* it: if we have in > the future another instance of identically-declared function in two FS > backends, the situation where libsvn_fs_x calls into the libsvn_fs_fs > version of the function may repeat. (That'll hopefully result in > a quick error or segfault.) > Well, the "bug" was that non-static function names should be prefixed with the respective module name but these were not. With "fixed" I meant: "now they are". It seems to me looking into the linker options --- and seeing how > libsvn_fs_x.so code managed to call into libsvn_fs_fs.so code --- would > still be an interesting exercise. > Yes, that would probably be insightful. -- Stefan^2.
