Re: rename functions as they conflict with glibc
Roman Rakus <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure if this problem is also fixed but this patch rename
> functions as they conflict with glibc.
Your mail addresses two problems:
The problem is that POSIX.1-2008 is in conflict with general rules in POSIX.
POSIX as well as glibc illegally uses these names: POSIX grants that it will
never break published older code. The POSIX standard for this reason was not
allowed to use these names. The Standard Commitee has even been informed about
the problem to no avail.
Note that the names in question are in widely spread public use since 1982 with
the interfaces used by libschily. So glibc is introducing a non-compliance
because the functions using the same names in glibc implement different
Your problem is a result of using _extremely_ outdated and even illegal (*)
sources from a questionable fork.
*) illegal because in 2006, the initators of the fork introduced modifications
that are in conflict with the Copyright law. The code you send cannot be legally
I recommend you to just upgrade to recent original code. Original code is
legally distributable and it does implement a workaround for the problem since
the non-POSIX compliant ;-) POSIX.1-2008 has been approved in Summer 2008.
Here is the recent original code:
Please upgrade all related code at RedHat's site as soon as possible and stop
publishing the code you are currently distributing.
EMail:email@example.com (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
firstname.lastname@example.org (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily