Hi Simon M., On Wednesday December 2, 2009, Simon Marlow wrote: > On 01/12/2009 06:49, Howard B. Golden wrote: > > Mon Nov 30 22:12:34 PST 2009 [email protected] > > * Fix GHC ticket 2615 (linker scripts in .so files) > > This patch only applies to systems that use ELF format files. > > The patch modifies the addDLL function so that it recognizes > > "invalid ELF header" errors. If these occur, the file that was > > opened is scanned for a linker script GROUP ( ... ) directive. If > > found, the first file inside the GROUP ( ... ) will be sent to > > dlopen. Any errors reported by dlopen then will be reported to the > > caller. > > Thanks Howard. I think the patch could do with a round of tweaks > before being pushed, comments below.
I will make the changes you suggest. Then I'll follow the full validation process. I have done much of this already. I noticed that there is only 1 failure: T1969. I don't think I can do anything about that, so I plan to disregard it. Please confirm. > Can we rely on the availability of regex.h and POSIX regexes? Does > this need a configure test? I don't know the answer to this. Isn't POSIX part of the baseline assumption? If not, I would need some help with the autoconf changes, since I haven't done any before. > We don't generally use atexit() in the RTS, all the cleanup has to be > done by hs_exit(). Typically each subsystem has an exitFoo() or > freeFoo() function called by hs_exit(). I'm uncertain about what I should do here. Should I simply remove the atexit() and the callback code. Or should I somehow link it up to hs_exit()? > I think you left some debug output in here. Suggest protecting it > with IF_DEBUG(linker, ...). I already discovered this when I ran the validation script. I'm not sure how to write a test case that can be added to the validation tests. By _hand_ I have been testing by running: $ ghc-stage2 --interactive -lpcre On my system (Gentoo), /usr/lib64/libpcre.so is a linker script. However, I don't think this will always be true on other systems. I'd appreciate some suggestions about how to write the test. > Also I suggest adding a comment referring to the ticket number, and > an brief description of the problem and solution. I will add this. Thanks for your thorough review! Now that I understand the QC process (validation scripts) I will try to use it as intended. Regards, Howard _______________________________________________ Cvs-ghc mailing list [email protected] http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-ghc
