On 02/11/2011 01:20 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 2/11/11 10:55 AM, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: >> what do you think of working around the memcpy troubles with glibc-2.13 by >> simply redirecting memcpy to memmove within glibc, either unconditionally or >> optional/temporary (via USE-flag?) until everyone uses memmove where >> necessary? > > I'm not a maintainer of base-system, but it seems to me that such a > change in behavior would only add to the confusion. glibc behaving > differently on Gentoo than other distros... no, that doesn't sound good.
While Fedora 14 has shipped with glibc-2.13 and vanilla memcpy it seems, I'm really curious if a next Red Hat Enterprise Linux or any distribution designed for enterprise environments would do so, risking commercial applications to break. So I'm not convinced yet that they can perpetuate this new memcpy implementation. /haubi/ -- Michael Haubenwallner Gentoo on a different level
