export list symbols
tsitkova at MIT.EDU
Tue Oct 20 13:50:34 EDT 2009
Sounds like a bad practice anyway, don't you think?
From: krbdev-bounces at MIT.EDU [krbdev-bounces at MIT.EDU] On Behalf Of Jeffrey Hutzelman [jhutz at cmu.edu]
Sent: Tuesday, October 20, 2009 1:12 PM
To: Nicolas Williams; Greg Hudson
Cc: krbdev at mit.edu; jhutz at cmu.edu
Subject: Re: export list symbols
--On Tuesday, October 20, 2009 11:07:55 AM -0500 Nicolas Williams
<Nicolas.Williams at sun.com> wrote:
> I think I missed that these were functions not listed in krb5.h. If a
> function is in a private header then I agree that automated static
> analysis is sufficient for deciding whether to make it not an exported
> symbol. Except for private-that-should-be-public symbols, of course,
> but that can be revisited later.
What about symbols which were previously removed from the public headers
(or were never prototyped), but remain exported to maintain backward
compatibility with existing users?
krbdev mailing list krbdev at mit.edu
More information about the krbdev