On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 6:46 PM Frank Ch. Eigler <f...@redhat.com> wrote: > > RFC: Is the option name --ar-member clear? Do we also want a variant > > (--all-ar-members) that checks whether all members match? Do we want > > this to work recursively? Should it print the member names that match > > instead of the archive file (is that useful?). > > Suggest "--any-ar-member" to clarify the name, and I wouldn't bother > with the other things.
I second this. Also I noticed the following gcc error when building with the patch applied: ‘__builtin___sprintf_chk’ argument 5 overlaps destination object ‘current_path’ [-Werror=restrict] [...] elfclassify.c: In function ‘check_ar_members’: elfclassify.c:47:14: note: destination object referenced by ‘restrict’-qualified argument 1 was declared here 47 | static char *current_path; gcc thinks one of the arguments to sprintf (ar_path) is an alias of the destination string (current_path). It's a false positive since current_path is reassigned before the sprintf call but the code can be adjusted to avoid this error. Aaron
