On Sun, Dec 29, 2002 at 10:48:24AM -0800, Ryan Bloom wrote: > > > On Sun, 29 Dec 2002, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > > At 12:21 AM 12/29/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >On 29 Dec 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > >> wrowe 2002/12/28 21:44:02 > > >> > > >> First; once any apr object is closed, the results are undefined. > > >... > > >> Index: testdso.c > > >> --- testdso.c 19 Dec 2002 16:15:29 -0000 1.30 > > >> +++ testdso.c 29 Dec 2002 05:44:01 -0000 1.31 > > >> ... > > >> @@ -155,17 +155,11 @@ > > >> > > >> status = apr_dso_unload(h); > > >> CuAssert(tc, apr_dso_error(h, errstr, 256), APR_SUCCESS == > > >> status); > > >> - > > >> - status = apr_dso_sym(&func1, h, "print_hello"); > > >> - CuAssertIntEquals(tc, APR_EINIT, status); > > >> } > > > > > >I seriously disagree with this change. > > > > > > >If the dso is unloaded, you > > >shouldn't be able to find a symbol in it anymore. > > > > I agree with you. However, h is now undefined. This means that we > > will generally react by segfaulting or throwing any indeterminate error. > > EINIT is a Unixism. > > There is no way at all that this code will segfault. Not on any platform, > because the unload only unloaded the native instance of the library, it > had no effect on the APR wrapper.
This test does segfault on OpenBSD (2.8); if _sym after _close is intended to be supported it would seem apr_dso_sym needs to fail early if handle->handle == NULL for the DLFCN case as well. joe
