Re: [PATCH] Add helper function for basename

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Dec 13, 2023 at 7:10 AM Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> wrote:
>
> Hi Khem,
>
> On Tue, 2023-12-12 at 09:16 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> > On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 5:18 AM Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2023-12-10 at 12:20 -0800, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > > musl does not provide GNU version of basename and lately have removed
> > > > the definiton from string.h [1] which exposes this problem. It can be
> > > > made to work by providing a local implementation of basename which
> > > > implements the GNU basename behavior, this makes it work across C
> > > > libraries which have POSIX implementation only.
> > >
> > > Thanks, this should work, but wouldn't it be easier to add a configure
> > > test for having basename defined in string.h and then only define
> > > basename in libeu.h (and build basename.c) if it isn't. So that all the
> > > code can just keep using basename (we just have to make sure libeu.h is
> > > included)?
> >
> > we could do that but it will not work as expected with older musl releases
> > where the prototype in string.h will exist.
>
> But that is good isn't it? Or did musl define basename in string.h with
> different semantics (where the given input string is modified)?

basename was declared like this till lately
https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/commit/?id=725e17ed6dff4d0cd22487bb64470881e86a92e7

>
> In the second case various elfutils libraries and tools probably just
> segfaulted when build/run against musl. And your patch would indeed fix
> both old and new musl versions. Do people using musl already use some
> variant of your patch?

This is not yet tried widely in distros as the musl patch above is
till new and not part of
a release yet.

>
> Thanks,
>
> Mark