Re: Weak x86 aliases

["Mathew, Cherry G." <cherry%zyx.in@localhost>]

On December 28, 2018 9:54:11 PM GMT+05:30, John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost> wrote:
>On Dec 28,  7:36pm, "Cherry G.Mathew" wrote:
>} Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> writes:
>} > Le 28/12/2018 �� 14:57, Cherry G.Mathew a ��crit :
>} >> Maxime Villard <max%m00nbsd.net@localhost> writes:
>} >>>> Introduce a weak alias method of exporting different
>implementations
>} >>>> of the same API.
>} >>>
>} >>> Please revert or fix this change.
>} >>
>} >> I'm not sure what the fix is - do you have a suggestion ?
>} >
>} > either re-apply it without using weak symbols, or change the
>modloader
>} > to accept weak symbols
>} 
>} I don't like the imperative in your tone. NVMM is the user of
>modloader,
>} not PVHVM. So if you feel like your usecase needs fixing, I'd say
>it's
>} your problem - or don't use modules, but see below.
>
>     I suspect there's a language issue here due to people using
>English as a second language.  However, I don't see an imperative
>(command) here.  You asked for suggestions on how to fix a problem.
>He answered your question with a couple of suggestions.  That's
>all.
>
>     Also, I would argue that the kernel uses modloader, not the
>module.  In any event, as mentioned, it is your change that broke
>things...
>
>}-- End of excerpt from "Cherry G.Mathew"

On second reading, I take that back. Replied too hastily, and maxv has kindly offered to work around the problem temporarily.


-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.