On Fri, 2013-05-17 at 22:35 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > When a dynamic extension is being remade, it is unloaded by calling > unload_file. The latter looks up its argument in a linked list of > loaded objects. Now, unload_file is called with file->name as its > argument; is it 100% sure that this string will be identical to what > was used in load_file? IOW, do we never change relative file names to > absolute ones (or vice versa), mirror backslashes to forward slashes, > or do any other transformations that produce a different string which > points to the same file? If we can do such transformations, unloading > will be unreliable.
Yes, I thought about this as I was making the change. I believe it is true that the initial pathname will be identical. However there are ways in which the path might change: for example through use of VPATH. I'm not exactly sure how all this will play out so it needs some testing. I still don't want to add back the pointer to the struct. Memory usage by GNU make is becoming a sore spot, especially as larger and larger build systems start to move to non-recursive make. If necessary we'll need to make the list a bit more sophisticated so we can add new elements to it if/when we rename targets. _______________________________________________ Bug-make mailing list Bug-make@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-make
