[Xorg] Re: DRI fixes for libdl module loader
ajax at nwnk.net
Thu Jul 22 10:05:28 PDT 2004
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
On Thursday 22 July 2004 04:09, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> Can't this be expressed with the native library dependency mechanisms of
> the OS? For instance, when you do 'ldd <somelibrary>', you get a list of
> other libraries it depends upon. Why can't we use this native mechanism to
> express the dependencies you're talking about?
Yes it can, but I don't want to. Partly because it's tough to do that in some
cases without build-time hacks (though granted said build-time hack has
already been written ). Partly because the elfloader doesn't have this
ability and code-compatibility with both loaders is desirable. And partly
because if we let the runtime linker handle that, we may as well go whole hog
and do away with LoadSubModule() altogether.
I just don't feel that's the right approach yet. We've gotten on rather well
with having modules that know their needs at runtime, and the minimal
solution to make them work with the dlloader is to eliminate weak data
references, which is ~80 lines of diffs. This works iff the relationship
between modules is well-defined. The relationship between libglx and libdri
is not well-defined yet, but fixing that is a matter of another LoadSubModule
call in the right place. I'm just asking where people think the right place
> Similarly, tasks like module init and module cleanup can be handled by
> native mechanisms (if you're not already doing this), rather than by
> bolting on new code around dlopen().
I'm not already doing this; people seem to want the elfloader to hang around
for a while.
- - ajax
 - http://freedesktop.org/bugzilla/attachment.cgi?id=176&action=view
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the xorg