Re: [Tinycc-devel] tcc_relocate() and tcc_relocate_ex()

[grischka]

Sean Conner wrote:
> It was thus said that the Great Thomas Preud'homme once stated:
> > Indeed, I agree the commit message is not very verbose as to the reason of the 
> > change. For people interested, the said commit is 
> > 8bbde91f62291cb0383c2406ae6123be903c944b
> >
> > That said, the change of API seems clearly intentional, as if 0.9.25's 
> > behavior had a fundamental problem. Thus, I'm reluctant to apply your patch 
> > right now. Grishka, could you tell us the context behind this revert?
>
>   I don't think 0.9.25 had problems, since currently, tcc_relocate() calls
> tcc_relocate_ex() (if HAVE_SELINUX is not defined).  The only thing I can
> think of is that a significant amount of code expected the 0.9.24 version of
> tcc_relocate() and it was easier to change 0.9.25 than to change the
> existing code, but that's just conjecture on my part.
>
>   -spc (I did try to keep the patch as simple and isloated as possible)

The reason to revert tcc_relocate was to make the libtcc_test example
look as simple as it was before.

The reason for not yet to export tcc_relocate_ex was that I wanted
to know if anyone would actually care for the 'extended' version,
i.e. to wait for someone to complain. :-)

As to the patch I think that
    +    s1->runtime_mem = NULL;
would break tcc_relocate and I don't see why you need it.

If you agree with I will push a patch to declare tcc_relocate_ex
as LIBTCCAPI and nothing else.

--- grischka