Re: [PATCH 5/8] perf symbols: Do not use ELF's symbol binding constants

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>]

Em Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 12:19:02AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> 2012-06-22 (금), 09:43 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo:
> > Why don't you set STB_GLOBAL, etc to the expected values when libelf is
> > not present? That way no changes need to be made to symbol.c

> > Ditto for GELF_ST_BIND.

> > I.e. keep the subset of libelf.h that we use, providing those
> > definitions on the poor man's libelf.h we should use when the "real
> > thing" is not available.

> I just tried to be independent to (lib)elf as much as possible. And I
> thought that using same macro name might cause a bit of confusion - at
> least for me - so I wanted to use more descriptive and generic name.

> But it's not a big deal. If you insist on using the same name is the
> better way, I can change it.

I think its better to use the well know names, libelf is not just one
implementation, there are several, and we are interested in people
experienced with those APIs to feel at ease when looking at our code :-)

Also as a general practice I try hard to reduce patch size, so
restricting the changes to allow building with an alternative, stripped
down libelf to the stripped down libelf headers seems like a good path
to follow.

- Arnaldo