Date: Tue, 01 Sep 1998 21:24:13 +0000 From: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: chuckr@glue.umd.edu, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: E-day problems: rtld-elf dlsym() broken? Message-ID: <199809012124.VAA00386@word.smith.net.au> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 01 Sep 1998 18:25:20 MST." <199809020125.SAA16732@austin.polstra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> In article <Pine.BSF.4.00.9809011733280.353-100000@picnic.mat.net>, > Chuck Robey <chuckr@glue.umd.edu> wrote: > > > Another tought occurred, tho: Will those functions finally be > > available for statically linked elf images? > > No. Never. I wish you folks would get that idea out of your heads, > because it ain't gonna happen. It is not feasible, for reasons having > to do with the fact that some variables would end up existing in two > places, one in the original static executable and another in whatever > object you just dlopened. > > There are good reasons why these functions have never been supported > (by any vendor) in static executables. Given that the goal here seems to be able to use dlopen to load modules into an otherwise self-contained executable, would it be more correct to suggest that the executable should be linked shared, but against a static copy of the C library? If this is correct, what's the "polite" way to explicitly reference libc? -- \\ Sometimes you're ahead, \\ Mike Smith \\ sometimes you're behind. \\ mike@smith.net.au \\ The race is long, and in the \\ msmith@freebsd.org \\ end it's only with yourself. \\ msmith@cdrom.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199809012124.VAA00386>