2018-01-10 4:22 GMT+01:00 k.suzaki <[email protected]>: > On 2018/01/09 17:10, k.suzaki wrote: > >> On 2018/01/09 15:49, Daniel Cegiełka wrote: >>> >>> 2018-01-09 3:22 GMT+01:00 k.suzaki <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>> Dear, >>>> >>>> I found some dlopen() functions in the stali source code. I guess they >>>> are obstacle of static linking. >>>> However, the configure files and .m4 files have the open >>>> "enable_dlopen=no". >>>> >>>> Are all dlopen() functions suppressed when the source files are compiled >>>> as static linking? >>>> # If so, it is a good job. >>> >>> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/12/08/4 >> >> I read the article "static linking and dlopen". There are many following >> threads discussing static linking and dlopen. >> However, I cannot understand the solution for stali. >> >> I found the useful thread which describes the dlopen in musl clearly. >> http://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2012/12/09/7 >> musl includes a dlopen function. >> When a binary is statically linked, it is a stub. >> When a binary is dynamically linked, it loads the shared library >> requested. >> >> Does a static linked binary in stali have a stub? >> Does the binary is suppressed by "enable_dlopen=no" at configure level? >> Or both?
I'm not a stali expert, but in my opinion, there is no enable_dlopen option at configure level. It's more libc case... https://git.musl-libc.org/cgit/musl/tree/src/ldso/dlopen.c ...so it's stub, when binary is statically linked.
