Re: .so and .a libs, tcl, postgres = in over my head
On Mon, Jul 06, 1998 at 07:26:48PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
>
> On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Dan Jacobowitz wrote:
>
> There is one compelling reason to have a libperl.so and that is to permit
> the perl binary modules to link against something. Right now (as I
> understand this) 'perl' has all of the symbols that libperl.so has and
> exports them so when it loads a library the library links to the symbols
> in 'perl' and everything is happy.
>
> Now when you move to the case with apache you have a problem, libperl.so
> is loaded, but it doesn't load into the global scope (that is what the
> patch hacks in) so when you go to load a perl module it blows up because
> it can't find the symbols.
>
> With a libperl.so all of the binary perl modules can link directly against
> it and then in the apache case the RTLD_GLOBAL flag can be removed as the
> dlinker will be able to properly locate the symbols.
Exactly - however, since that would require a policy change, we've
decided to just hack around it for now. As it is, most perl modules
compile perfectly more or less out of the box - I'd hate changing that
if not necessary, plus it would prevent loading of any CPAN modules the
user happens to install on their own, a serious problem. I think it
may be too restrictive of a Right Thing in this case, and perhaps we
should stick with the Wrong Thing.
Dan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: