On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 02:28:59PM -0300, Érico Nogueira wrote: > On Mon Oct 26, 2020 at 3:10 PM -03, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > Hi Érico, > > > > On Mon, 2020-10-26 at 12:03 -0300, Érico Nogueira via Elfutils-devel > > wrote: > > > Do elfutils program actually depend on the extra functionality > > > enabled by > > > FNM_EXTMATCH? Is changing the flag to have no effect a "bug"? > > > > Yes. The extended wildcard pattern is relied upon by both > > eu-strip with > > > > --keep-section=SECTION Keep the named section. SECTION is an > > extended wildcard pattern. May be given > > more than once. > > > > and eu-elfcompress with > > > > -n, --name=SECTION SECTION name to (de)compress, SECTION is an > > extended wildcard pattern (defaults to > > '.?(z)debug*') > > > > In the eu-strip case it might be reasoned that instead of a > > wildcard pattern the user might most of the time simply provide > > a section name as is (especially since the option may be given > > multiple times). But in the case of eu-elfcompress the > > program relies on the default SECTION name being an extended > > wildcard pattern. So not supporting FNM_EXTMATCH breaks the > > default functionality of eu-elfcompress. > > > > Cheers, > > > > Mark > > Understood, thank you. I'm replying to the musl mailing list as well, > then, to hopefully gather more opinions, since I don't know what the > best way of solving this would be.
I'm pretty sure we don't want to adopt further fnmatch extensions like this since they seem to affect the big-O's required to do matching and preclude good algorithms. I like Max's solution here with multiple patterns. If elfutils really wants to keep using FNM_EXTMATCH it should probably ship something like gnulib with a replacement fnmatch for systems that don't have it. Rich
