Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Howdy Bob! On 22 May 2007, at 15:32, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: On Tue, 22 May 2007, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Except for annoyance to the end-user, I was originally thinking that we don't need to distinguish. When the developer's libltdl client code calls lt_dladvise_global, we could have it emit a

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

On Tue, 22 May 2007, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Except for annoyance to the end-user, I was originally thinking that we don't need to distinguish. When the developer's libltdl client code calls lt_dladvise_global, we could have it emit a warning to stderr that says: If what you are trying to do won

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

On 22 May 2007, at 13:48, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:24:25PM CEST: On 22 May 2007, at 13:16, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:11:03PM CEST: I'm wondering how to best warn people who have their project bu

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:24:25PM CEST: > On 22 May 2007, at 13:16, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:11:03PM CEST: >>> >>> I'm wondering how to best warn people who have their project >>> build rely on RTLD_GLOBAL that what they a

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Hallo Ralf, On 22 May 2007, at 13:16, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:11:03PM CEST: I'm wondering how to best warn people who have their project build rely on RTLD_GLOBAL that what they are doing is inherently non-portable. Erm, relying on RTLD_LOCAL

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

* Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 02:11:03PM CEST: > > I'm wondering how to best warn people who have their project > build rely on RTLD_GLOBAL that what they are doing is inherently > non-portable. Erm, relying on RTLD_LOCAL is non-portable. Relying on RTLD_GLOBAL is not; after all

FYI: 331-gary-lt_dladvise-test-portability

Committed to HEAD: Index: libtool--devo--0/ChangeLog === --- libtool--devo--0.orig/ChangeLog +++ libtool--devo--0/ChangeLog @@ -1,3 +1,12 @@ +2007-05-22 Gary V. Vaughan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> + + * tests/lt_dladvis

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Hallo Ralf, On 22 May 2007, at 13:03, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Not sure what you intend here. I don't see how libtool can automatically detect non-portability to happen here. If all you're out to is add a warning to the test source code, then sure, go ahead. I'm wondering how to best warn peop

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Hello Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 12:30:26PM CEST: > On 22 May 2007, at 10:45, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: >> >> I'd prefer, if it's not too much work, that the test be run on all >> systems, but on the tough ones not build moddepend, and exit SKIP >> even if the other modules

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

On 22 May 2007, at 10:45, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: Hi Gary, Hallo Ralf! * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:38:02AM CEST: Looking at this again in the fresh light of day, I realised that the entire point of the moddepend test is to check that its unresolved symbols can be s

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Hi Gary, * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:38:02AM CEST: > > Looking at this again in the fresh light of day, I realised that the entire > point of the moddepend test is to check that its unresolved symbols can be > satisfied from the program that lt_dlopen()'s it when using the g

Re: 329-gary-allow-RTLD_GLOBAL

Morgen Ralf, On 21 May 2007, at 18:20, Gary V. Vaughan wrote: * Gary V. Vaughan wrote on Tue, May 08, 2007 at 04:42:09PM CEST: That would defeat building moddepend with unresolved symbols at link time, so that we can test that it correctly calls the matching symbols from modglobal after load