Re: [PATCH 2/2] alloca.3: rewrite NOTES

G. Branden Robinson
2021-08-24T10:05:28Z

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 945 bytes --]

At 2021-08-24T11:50:57+0200, Michael Kerrisk (man-pages) wrote:
> On 8/23/21 11:01 PM, наб wrote:
> > -option is given
> > -.BR and
> > -the header
> > -.I <alloca.h>
> > -is not included.
> > -Otherwise, (without an \-ansi or \-std=c* option) the glibc version of
> > -.I <stdlib.h>
> > -includes
> > +are specified, in which case
> > .I <alloca.h>
> > -and that contains the lines:
> > +is required, lest an actual symbol dependency is emitted.
>
> (That last line seems like a useful addition!)

I agree, but I note that the verb should be in the subjunctive mood.
Also, is the word "actual" doing any work here? If <alloca.h> is
omitted, does some kind of virtual dependency or weak reference end up
in the object file (I'm not an ELF wizard). If so, perhaps the nature
of that symbol should be explicitly identified.

Thus:

[[
is required, lest a symbol dependency be emitted.
]]

Regards,
Branden