Re: GNOME 1 ABI involving libpng
>> Akira TAGOH <tagoh@debian.org> writes:
> I'm not sure but for example if there are some modules depends on
> RTLD_GLOBAL, then we have patched glib2.0, such modules won't work on
> Debian.
As I already argued, you can't depend on glib using RTLD_GLOBAL because
not every architecture where glib is available supports that feature.
Let me try again: if you write a program which depends on glib
importing symbols into the global namespace, you just wrote a
non-portable program.
> >> To another solution, if there are an architecture which has broken
> >> RTLD_GLOBAL on Debian, I'll apply a patch to stop the glib2.0 build.
>
> MEM> There isn't. Not even the vapourware architectures, I dare to guess.
>
> Yes, *now*. and we can't promise dlopen isn't definitely broken. if
> all you're afraid a compatibility, I think we should do that to
> prevent the building with broken glibc.
I'm sorry, I can't make sense out of that.
Are you saying "there's a chance that dlopen is broken"? If that's
correct, how do you reconcile this and the paragraph I quoted at the
top of this email? I can't really tell if you are agreeing with me or
not.
> Yes, Red Hat did that to gdk-pixbuf, not glib1.2. that's one of what
> Owen proposed.
Give me a second to look at that patch...
Good grief. The "patch" essentially puts a local copy of the g_module
functions inside gdk-pixbuf.
--
Marcelo | This signature was automatically generated with
mmagallo@debian.org | Signify v1.07. For this and other cool products,
| check out http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: