From: Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com>
To: gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com
Subject: Re: RFA: always default to using the libiberty regex
Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2003 14:39:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030128143932.GA19699@nevyn.them.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <3E369535.5040100@redhat.com>
On Tue, Jan 28, 2003 at 09:35:33AM -0500, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> >On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 04:56:56PM -0800, Martin M. Hunt wrote:
> >
> >>This patch deletes the configure code to check the OS implementation of
> >>regex and default to that. The default will now always be the builtin.
> >>
> >>
> >>2003-01-27 Martin M. Hunt <hunt@redhat.com>
> >>
> >> * configure.in: Revert check for system regex. Use builtin regex by
> >>default.
> >> * configure: Rebuilt.
> >>
> >
> >
> >I'm still not convinced this is a good idea.
> >
> >Context: it's a bug in the system's GNU C library, and should be fixed
> >as such. All the rest of us who have a version of glibc which has this
> >issue addressed don't have a problem, and I don't really want to carry
> >around yet another statically linked copy of regex if I don't need to.
> >Since it doesn't manifest on my system, I suspect it is fixed in glibc
> >2.3.1; it's another piece of fallout from Red Hat's choice of using the
> >brand-new barely-tested glibc 2.2.93 for their desktop product.
>
> There are several choices here:
>
> - GDB prefers the installed regex.
>
> This is what the current config is doing.
> I think it is telling that the patch hasn't even been in for a month
> and, already, we've hit problems. No matter where the problem is, it is
> GDB that will get the blame. I also believe that way back when this was
> last debated, specific regex releases were identified as problematic.
>
>
> - GDB prefers the bundled regex.
>
> This is what the old config was doing.
> Doing this means that GDB needs to, at regular intervals, upgrade that
> code. We do this now for readline. It also means that the GDB
> developers are insulated from problems with the utility libraries.
>
>
> As best I can tell, the only people that really benefit from the system
> regex are those making distros - it saves them the hassle of having to
> remember --with-..regex=. GDB developers don't benefit - we all need to
> specify the bundled regex as otherwize we can't reproduce each others
> results (cf Martin's problem). GDB users don't benefit as they now get
> a GDB of unknown quality.
Put that way, the patch is OK with me.
--
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-01-28 14:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-01-28 0:54 Martin M. Hunt
2003-01-28 3:33 ` Daniel Jacobowitz
2003-01-28 14:35 ` Andrew Cagney
2003-01-28 14:39 ` Daniel Jacobowitz [this message]
2003-01-29 12:05 Mark Kettenis
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20030128143932.GA19699@nevyn.them.org \
--to=drow@mvista.com \
--cc=gdb-patches@sources.redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox