On Mon, 5 May 2025 at 12:51, Reuben Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, 2 May 2025 at 02:30, Bruno Haible <[email protected]> wrote: > > I don't think requiring -ldl is a "small" price to pay. It increases the >> startup times of the programs linked to that library. Therefore how about >> using dladdr only on those platforms where it is in libc? This would cover >> all the platform that you mentioned, and on Cygwin it would be a speedup >> (likely no system calls instead of reading from the /proc file system). >> > > I just re-read this, and realised that presumably this means that using > dladdr would also be an improvement on Linux with glibc or uClibc, where > currently we also read /proc? Which means that the /proc-reading code can > be removed, as it is only used on the above-mentioned combinations plus > Cygwin, which you already said would be faster with dladdr. > > I attach an updated patch. I have dealt with the shortcomings I previously > identified: I check whether the path returned by dladdr is NULL before > attempting to strdup it, and I add the same support to the relocatable-lib > module. I have removed the previous Cygwin/Linux code in favour of this > simpler, faster method. >
Ping! Any further thoughts on this? I've made a release of Enchant using this patch and so far no complaints… -- https://rrt.sc3d.org
