[systemd-devel] configurable IDN flags usage in getnameinfo()

Lennart Poettering lennart at poettering.net
Tue Jun 13 20:53:46 UTC 2017


On Tue, 13.06.17 23:48, Mantas Mikul─Śnas (grawity at gmail.com) wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Lennart Poettering <lennart at poettering.net
> > wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 13.06.17 03:11, Waldemar Brodkorb (wbx at openadk.org) wrote:
> >
> > > Another option might be to add a new configure option to
> > > control the IDN usage in systemd. You already have a lot of
> > > fine granular options to configure systemd, another would'nt harm.
> >
> > While I am not a fan of the proliferation of config options I think
> > this one would probably be OK.
> >
> > Having an option for disabling all IDN support should be OK.
> >
> > > I am not asking to add any C library specific workaround, but for
> > > a little portability/configurability with nearly no costs.
> > >
> > > Sure I could add libidn to uClibc-ng like GNU C library to add
> > > the missing IDN functionality, but this would add nearly 1 megabyte
> > > of code, which isn't a nice option for embedded Linux people.
> > > du -chs libidn/
> > > 956K    libidn/
> > > 956K    total
> >
> > I wonder if there's really a good reason why the IDN stuff needs to be
> > that large... The algorithms behind it appear to be relatively simple,
> > no? Maybe I am missing something, but maybe a nice way out would be to
> > implement the algorithms in a more minimal fashion...
> 
> AFAIK most of it is Unicode data (in redundant textual format), not
> code.

And why does it need to ship that? And if it really needs it doesn't
the system ship that anyway?

> (Also, libidna is for IDNA2003. The successor, libidn2 for IDNA2008, seems
> to result in a .so that's only half the size of libidn.)

We now support either.

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat


More information about the systemd-devel mailing list