-- This is continuation from a other MSE topic --
>>On 2017-09-08 19:18, Martin Schreiber wrote:
>> Free Pascal should allow to define the SONAME source in binding unit -
>> using
>> dlopen()/dlsym() instead is a hack IMHO.
>On 2017-09-08 20:18, Graeme wrote:
>I think so too.
OK, ok, I
> Please take the attached patch for inspiration.
Wow, thanks Martin.
Will test it tonight.
Write you later.
Fre;D
--
Sent from: http://mseide-msegui-talk.13964.n8.nabble.com/
--
Check out the vibrant tech
> > Maybe in compiler/link.pas:509 (TLinker.AddSharedCLibrary()).
Procedure TLinker.AddSharedCLibrary(S:TCmdStr);
begin
if s='' then
exit;
{ remove prefix 'lib' }
if
Copy(s,1,length(target_info.sharedclibprefix))=target_info.sharedclibprefix
then
> I do not understand...
OK, I do understand now.
So it will not be possible to use ld-linux.so.2 for calling the library form
where/ when you want.
> Please do not confuse "static" linking and "dynamic"
OK. Let do like this:
"shared/dynamic" linking using ld-linux.so.2:
I will call it "ld
Hello Graeme.
For me the most important is that we are not in trouble ;-)
Thanks.
Fre;D
--
Sent from: http://mseide-msegui-talk.13964.n8.nabble.com/
--
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
On 2017-09-08 19:18, Martin Schreiber wrote:
Free Pascal should allow to define the SONAME source in binding unit - using
dlopen()/dlsym() instead is a hack IMHO.
I think so too. I source of the problem is FPC, and that is where the
fix should go.
I do applaud Fred for his efforts and
On Saturday 09 September 2017 14:49:43 fredvs wrote:
> Re-hello.
>
> Huh, in previous mail, at end please read this:
>
> The last war would be "What is better: libdl.so.2 or ld-linux.so.2 ?
>
> Could it be possible to imagine a different dynlibs.pas ?
> Actual dynlibs.pas is using libdl.so.2.
>
Re-hello.
Huh, in previous mail, at end please read this:
The last war would be "What is better: libdl.so.2 or ld-linux.so.2 ?
Could it be possible to imagine a different dynlibs.pas ?
Actual dynlibs.pas is using libdl.so.2.
Could it be possible to use ld-linux.so.2 instead (with
> Then the application can not start if the library is not found and
> it can not be compiled if there is no libX11.so -> ibX11.so.6 link.
Of course the "double advantage" works only if buggy "external" was fixed !
;-)
> Maybe in compiler/link.pas:509 (TLinker.AddSharedCLibrary()).
OK, I will
On Saturday 09 September 2017 13:35:18 fredvs wrote:
> Hello Martin.
>
> Do you know where in fpc code (or how to find it) "external" is assigned
> and 'so.n' deleted ?
>
Maybe in compiler/link.pas:509 (TLinker.AddSharedCLibrary()).
Martin
On Saturday 09 September 2017 12:53:22 fredvs wrote:
> > Another advantage of ld-linux.so.2 is that it is possible to list the
>
> needed libraries by "ldd ".
>
> Huh, it is what I try to explain: you may use dlopen()/dlsym() and list
> list the needed libraries by "ldd".
> ---> Add in dynamic
Hello Martin.
Do you know where in fpc code (or how to find it) "external" is assigned and
'so.n' deleted ?
Fre;D
--
Sent from: http://mseide-msegui-talk.13964.n8.nabble.com/
--
Check out the vibrant tech community
> Another advantage of ld-linux.so.2 is that it is possible to list the
needed libraries by "ldd ".
Huh, it is what I try to explain: you may use dlopen()/dlsym() and list list
the needed libraries by "ldd".
---> Add in dynamic linking code a {$linklib} statement (or Procedure
dummy() ; cdecl;
13 matches
Mail list logo
