On 16 Nov 2022 16:13, Michael Matz wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Nov 2022, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > are you claiming that current gnulib versions can't support even those old
> > versions of glibc ?  i'd find that extremely surprising, and really sounds
> > like a bug that should be taken up with the gnulib folks.
> 
> No.  I'm claiming that moving to gnulib is work (even if perhaps not 
> much?) and change and I (personally) don't see the need to invest into 
> that work and deal with the change.  Had you asked "should I look into 
> using gnulib in bfd" my answer would have been "well, try it, why not?".  
> But you asked "should _we_ look" (aka should someone do that), hence my 
> answer was in the line of "perhaps, but why bother?".

you're proposing adding a not insignificant amount of custom portability logic
and making the readelf code harder to understand & maintain while also not
fixing the same bug in other binutils/ tools.  it is perfectly reasonable to
ask you to not add tech debt & make the code base worse off for everyone else
to maintain, and instead focus on a common solution that the GNU project is
already heavily invested in.  this is, of course, the "GNU Binutils" project.
-mike