From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <435A110C.7010707@cornell.edu> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2005 06:14:36 -0400 From: Ivan Gyurdiev MIME-Version: 1.0 To: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov CC: Stephen Smalley Subject: Re: [ SEPOL ] Context interface cleanup References: <43595049.2@cornell.edu> <4359547D.3050001@cornell.edu> In-Reply-To: <4359547D.3050001@cornell.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Sender: owner-selinux@tycho.nsa.gov List-Id: selinux@tycho.nsa.gov Ivan Gyurdiev wrote: > >> - removes the sepol_ prefix, which I use to indicate whether a >> function is exported or not > Actually, can that still create a namespace conflict during static > linking? > Would it make a difference if it was marked 'static' ? > > What should I name all those things... > I want sepol_context_* to be reserved for the record that represents a > context.. > I wanted context_* for the internal structure, for consistency with > other code (but the other code is static_inline...). Allright - well I still don't know if this namespace issue is a problem, but: - the other changes are valid (like hiding those functions in an internal header, and removing services.c relay), and - this is more consistent with the rest of the code - in other words, if the prefix is changed in one place, it should likely be changed everywhere instead (so context_cpy -> [new_prefix]_cpy, instead of only changing those new functions to something else). - I want to write more patches over the weekend based on this one So, let me know what you want to do, and if necessary I'll send a followup patch to set naming to the right thing. In the meantime - there's other things to fix. -- This message was distributed to subscribers of the selinux mailing list. If you no longer wish to subscribe, send mail to majordomo@tycho.nsa.gov with the words "unsubscribe selinux" without quotes as the message.