This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: PATCH: Treat RTLD_LOCAL like Solaris (Re: Duplicate data objects in shared libraries)
- From: "David Abrahams" <david dot abrahams at rcn dot com>
- To: "H . J . Lu" <hjl at lucon dot org>,"Jason Merrill" <jason at redhat dot com>
- Cc: "Martin v. Loewis" <martin at v dot loewis dot de>,<drepper at redhat dot com>,"Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve" <rwgk at cci dot lbl dot gov>,"GNU C Library" <libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com>
- Date: Wed, 29 May 2002 17:41:45 -0400
- Subject: Re: PATCH: Treat RTLD_LOCAL like Solaris (Re: Duplicate data objects in shared libraries)
- References: <76260000.1021912729@warlock.codesourcery.com> <wvlhel2ocz3.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com> <60630000.1021922077@gandalf.codesourcery.com> <00ba01c20035$805388a0$6601a8c0@boostconsulting.com> <wvln0uumvqt.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com> <08b101c201f0$d511fd60$6601a8c0@boostconsulting.com> <wvloff7ea9a.fsf@prospero.cambridge.redhat.com> <20020529130945.A16909@lucon.org>
- Reply-to: "David Abrahams" <david dot abrahams at rcn dot com>
From: "H . J . Lu" <hjl@lucon.org>
> This patch makes glibc more like Solaris for RTLD_LOCAL. It also passed
> "make check" in glibc. Any comments?
It's not clear to me that working "more like Solaris" was what we were
after, and since I don't know the loader code I can't evaluate the patch
very well. Would you mind describing the semantic differences caused by
your patch, and if possible, how they play out in C++?
> BTW, we need to fully document the RTLD_LOCAL behavior.
More documentation is always appreciated!
Thanks,
Dave