From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 70556 invoked by alias); 16 Nov 2019 00:52:02 -0000 Mailing-List: contact elfutils-devel-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: Sender: elfutils-devel-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 70532 invoked by uid 89); 16 Nov 2019 00:52:02 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Checked: by ClamAV 0.100.3 on sourceware.org X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 spammy= X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.1 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on sourceware.org X-Spam-Level: X-HELO: gnu.wildebeest.org Received: from wildebeest.demon.nl (HELO gnu.wildebeest.org) (212.238.236.112) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 00:52:01 +0000 Received: from tarox.wildebeest.org (tarox.wildebeest.org [172.31.17.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F2DF0300073F; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:51:58 +0100 (CET) Received: by tarox.wildebeest.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D79C3405CC5A; Sat, 16 Nov 2019 01:51:58 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <5464c3c8520ccd2fc6522e287993b205dda7d25f.camel@klomp.org> Subject: Re: patch 1/2 debuginfod client From: Mark Wielaard To: "Frank Ch. Eigler" Cc: elfutils-devel@sourceware.org, amerey@redhat.com Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 00:52:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20191114112430.GA873@redhat.com> References: <20191028190438.GC14349@redhat.com> <20191028190602.GD14349@redhat.com> <20191114112430.GA873@redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Evolution 3.28.5 (3.28.5-5.el7) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Flag: NO X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2019-q4/txt/msg00154.txt.bz2 On Thu, 2019-11-14 at 06:24 -0500, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote: > > [...libdw* debuginfod_find_* calls] > > But given that they are almost similar, I would suggest to move both > > into their own file sharing most of the code to do the dlopen dance. >=20 > Where? It can't be in the solib. We're talking about sharing, what, > two copies of three or four lines of code (the two dlopen attempts?), > and a replacement function will not be shorter, all-in. I was just thinking put them together in one file. Otherwise, just add a comment in both that there is similar code in the other file and if you update one, then you probably want to update the other too. Cheers, Mark