[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Are libtool .la files in non-dev library packages bugs?



On Tue, Aug 20, 2002 at 02:24:21PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> >> Roberto Gordo Saez <rgs@linalco.com> writes:
> 
>  > Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
>  > > A wild guess: I don't know about the files named lib*.la, but the other
>  > > ones could be plug-ins.  ltdl opens the .la file to find out the actual
>  > 
>  > Yes, you are right, but... why does a plugin need both .so and .la files?
> 
>  Because when you use ltdl's dlopen replacement, the function looks for
>  the .la file instead of the .so file.

Not so.

lt_dlopen() looks for the exact file you specify.

lt_dlopenext() looks first for .la, then for whatever the local system
conventionally uses (.so on gnu platforms).

Both are quite capable of operating on the .so directly, as long as
you don't use some of the more arcane features (dlpreopen and so
forth).

-- 
  .''`.  ** Debian GNU/Linux ** | Andrew Suffield
 : :' :  http://www.debian.org/ | Dept. of Computing,
 `. `'                          | Imperial College,
   `-             -><-          | London, UK

Attachment: pgpqTqrCCTB5v.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: