This is the mail archive of the libc-hacker@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.
Note that libc-hacker is a closed list. You may look at the archives of this list, but subscription and posting are not open.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
On Thu, Jul 20, 2000 at 08:27:31PM -0700, Geoff Keating wrote: > > 2.2 is ok. The linker may not know what the runtime linker will do > > when it sees a known dtag. As more and more new features are added to > > those new dtags, glibc may need them to work correctly. > > I know I _can_ use it, but when do I _have_ to use it? What would go > wrong if the linker never emitted any of these tags? > The reason I added the support is Ulrich wanted DF_1_NODELETE for libpthread.so. Without it, libpthread.so loaded in via dlopen may get unloaded by dlclose which will cause problems. Basically, those new dtags give DSO developers new flexibility and control over DSOs. You can take a look at http://docs.sun.com:80/ab2/coll.45.13/LLM/@Ab2PageView/21165?Ab2Lang=C&Ab2Enc=iso-8859-1 to see what you can use. But you will need support from ld.so for any new features. Ulrich just added the support for DF_1_NODELETE and DF_1_NOOPEN to glibc 2.2. You can use them on DSOs. I can see DF_1_INTERPOSE, DF_1_LOADFLTR and DF_1_NODEFLIB be useful to me in some cases. H.J.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |