[Python-Dev] Re: Minimal GCC/Linux shared lib + EH bug example
David Abrahams" <firstname.lastname@example.org
Sun, 12 May 2002 09:49:32 -0500
Jason, I had to write all the following exposition to understand your
reply, but then it dawned on me what you meant ;-)
I wrote, describing existing Linux/GCC semantics:
> >>> 4. lib2.so is loaded with RTLD_LOCAL. Because it's RTLD_LOCAL, the
> >>> again creates a new "symbol space"; no duplicates are shared with
And then, describing my preferred semantics:
> >>> What I'd prefer to happen is that in step 4, the loader would use the
> >>> existing definition for any loaded symbol which is defined in or used
> >>> lib2's immediate dependencies. That would nicely model the concept
> >>> lib2.so is sharing globally with X.so but not with lib1.so, and it
> >>> like the "right" solution.
> >> I noticed that the readme says that the test passes on Solaris. Does
> >> provide these semantics? How about SCO? Anyone?
Assuming by "these semantics", Jason meant my preferred semantics:
> > The test as written doesn't really tell us the answer since it uses EH
> > any implementation can make it a non-issue by comparing
> > strings instead of addresses.
> I meant using gcc 3.0.4 on Solaris.
Ah yes, GCC 3.0.4 would tell us something, since it is using address
comparison. If it worked on Solaris, that would be just as good as using a
different test with that looked at addresses of template static data
members. Good question.