[Bug libc/34437] posix_spawn_file_actions_addchdir and posix_spawn_file_actions_addfchdir not available as exported symbols
"adhemerval.zanella at linaro dot org via Glibc-bugs" <[email protected]> Mon, 27 Jul 2026 12:15:47 +0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lib.glibc.bugs |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]/bugzilla/> |
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D34437 --- Comment #3 from Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval.zanella at linaro dot or= g> --- (In reply to Bruno Haible from comment #0) > Commit 7594b4e5a75d41e891782aa7e3fb51924f6840cb (committed on 2026-04-07) > adds the functions posix_spawn_file_actions_addchdir and > posix_spawn_file_actions_addfchdir, defined by POSIX:2024, through a > modification of <spawn.h>. >=20 > They are *not* exported at the linker level, from libc.so. In other words, > they are missing from > glibc-2.44/sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/64/libc.abilist. >=20 > This has the effect that the usual Autoconf test > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([posix_spawn_file_actions_addchdir]) > or > AC_CHECK_FUNCS([posix_spawn_file_actions_addfchdir]) > reports these functions as nonexistent in glibc 2.44. >=20 > Each such symbol where AC_CHECK_FUNCS does not work causes extra trouble = to > developers (such as seen for 'strerror_r'). >=20 > Glibc has a proper mechanism for creating an alias name for an existing > symbol at the linker level, such as seen for > - sprintf and _IO_sprintf > - pthread_getspecific and __pthread_getspecific > - pthread_key_create and __pthread_key_create > - free and cfree > - obstack_free and _obstack_free > - ffs and __ffs > - memcmp and __memcmpeq > - sysctl and __sysctl > and so on. Why not use it here as well? It saves us to export an additional symbol and I did not foresee that such configure checks would fail, since they bypass the C headers and deliberate= ly redeclares the function with a bogus prototype. This will add the additional constraint on exporting all extensions that are ratified by POSIX as extra symbols, not ideal but doable. Is this really a glibc bug? >=20 > Originally reported by Xi Ruoyao <[email protected]> at > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2026-07/msg00164.html --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=