Re: Exported symbols removed in 2.5.2

[Steve Grubb <sgrubb@redhat.com>]

On Tuesday, May 03, 2016 05:04:04 PM Laurent Bigonville wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> In debian, during the build  of a package, we have a tool checking if
> symbols are removed from shared librearies.
> 
> With the 2.5.2 release, I get the following output:
> 
> --- debian/libauparse0.symbols (libauparse0_1:2.5.2-1_amd64)
> +++ dpkg-gensymbolsmB_9P2    2016-05-03 15:01:10.606713310 +0000
> @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
>   libauparse.so.0 libauparse0 #MINVER#
>    au_terminate_all_events@Base 1:2.5.1
> - audit_strsplit@Base 1:2.4.2
> - audit_strsplit_r@Base 1:2.4.2
> +#MISSING: 1:2.5.2-1# audit_strsplit@Base 1:2.4.2
> +#MISSING: 1:2.5.2-1# audit_strsplit_r@Base 1:2.4.2
>    auparse_add_callback@Base 1:2.2.1
>    auparse_destroy@Base 1:2.2.1
>    auparse_do_interpretation@Base 1:2.3.1
> @@ -49,4 +49,4 @@
>    ausearch_clear@Base 1:2.2.1
>    ausearch_next_event@Base 1:2.2.1
>    ausearch_set_stop@Base 1:2.2.1
> - set_escape_mode@Base 1:2.4.4
> +#MISSING: 1:2.5.2-1# set_escape_mode@Base 1:2.4.4
> dpkg-gensymbols: warning: some symbols or patterns disappeared in the
> symbols file: see diff output below
> dpkg-gensymbols: warning: debian/libaudit1/DEBIAN/symbols doesn't match
> completely debian/libaudit1.symbols
> --- debian/libaudit1.symbols (libaudit1_1:2.5.2-1_amd64)
> +++ dpkg-gensymbolsQATT_C    2016-05-03 15:01:10.802717308 +0000
> @@ -56,7 +56,7 @@
>    audit_rule_syscall_data@Base 1:2.2.1
>    audit_rule_syscallbyname_data@Base 1:2.2.1
>    audit_send@Base 1:2.2.1
> - audit_send_user_message@Base 1:2.2.1
> +#MISSING: 1:2.5.2-1# audit_send_user_message@Base 1:2.2.1
>    audit_set_backlog_limit@Base 1:2.2.1
>    audit_set_backlog_wait_time@Base 1:2.4.2
>    audit_set_enabled@Base 1:2.2.1
> 
> Is that expected that these 4 symbols have been removed?

Yes. This corresponds to the changelog entry:

- Revise function hiding technique to better protect audit ABI

All functions missing are internal to the audit libraries and could cause 
symbols collisions or worse if people start using them even though they are 
not declared in the library headers.

-Steve