On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 09:24:32AM -0700, Jordan Brown wrote: > Nicolas Williams wrote: > >On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 08:46:13AM -0700, Jordan Brown wrote: > >>Nicolas Williams wrote: > >>>In other words: it's safe to use any _documented_ feature of rpcgen. > >>Right, and these various possibilities all depend on _undocumented_ > >>features and behaviors. > > > >I'm not seeing what undocumented feature you'll be relying on. > > Actually, there's one variant that would rely only on arguably documented > features: if you use -L and interpose on syslog. Interposing on libc > functions just makes me queasy.
But I thought it was clear that using a CPP macro to rename that symbol was the way to go. > All of the other variations involve macros and those make assumptions about > the structure of the generated file. I don't agree. The XDR input to rpcgen is definitely stable, if not even Committed Standard at least in part (since it is documented in a standards-track RFC). > >Even if you were, if it's a "behavior that rises to the level of an > >interface" then you're still safe. > > > >If in doubt then ask ARC members if it's worth running a case. > > Yes on both counts.
