From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-2.mimecast.com [205.139.110.61]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775E138708AF for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 08:24:25 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 775E138708AF Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-284-R6--_2rFMI6IewD2NkHN3A-1; Wed, 03 Jun 2020 04:24:23 -0400 X-MC-Unique: R6--_2rFMI6IewD2NkHN3A-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx08.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 28AF0A0BDC; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 08:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from oldenburg2.str.redhat.com (ovpn-112-181.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.112.181]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6CA5619C4F; Wed, 3 Jun 2020 08:24:21 +0000 (UTC) From: Florian Weimer To: Adhemerval Zanella Cc: Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-alpha Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/13] string: Implement strerror in terms of strerror_l References: <20200519180518.318733-1-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <20200519180518.318733-7-adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org> <87r1v4cmmf.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> <16239ba1-6ab3-6fe3-85ac-7ea1a3459910@linaro.org> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 10:24:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: <16239ba1-6ab3-6fe3-85ac-7ea1a3459910@linaro.org> (Adhemerval Zanella's message of "Mon, 1 Jun 2020 15:28:36 -0300") Message-ID: <87eeqwzhe4.fsf@oldenburg2.str.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.84 on 10.5.11.23 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 X-Mimecast-Originator: redhat.com Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2, SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on server2.sourceware.org X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2020 08:24:26 -0000 * Adhemerval Zanella: > POSIX states the strerror buffer *might* be overwritten by a subsequent > call to strerror *or* strerror_l (as an extension to the ISO C). So my > understanding is an implementation has the freedom to implement strerror > on top of strerror_l and share its internal buffer (bionic and musl seem > to share this understanding was well). My recollection is that the wording in POSIX is asymmetric (one invalidates the other, but not the other direction). I don't think that matters, it's probably just an unfortunate wording. > What about add this NEWS entry at deprecated and removed features: > > * Both strerror and strerror_l now share the same internal buffer, meaning > that the returned string pointer might be invalidated or contents might > be overwritten in subsequent calls of any symbol. s/any symbol/either function/? There are some weird spaces before the line break. Thanks, Florian