Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:48:16 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: ldso: dlclose. On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 02:39:38PM +0200, Arvid E. Picciani wrote: > On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 20:48:03 -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > > >To elaborate, removing a DSO from a process's address space is highly > >non-trivial and error-prone. > > In fact it doesn't even work correctly in glibc. > It's just that usually no one notices. Indeed, and they closed my bug report about it as invalid. I've refiled the bug with binutils, which has the -z nodelete option, requesting that this option be made default. Only libraries intentionally marked as unload-safe should be unloadable. Anyway, unless the issue is fixed in binutils so that the vast majority of libraries are marked non-unloadable, I don't see anything we can do in musl. "glibc does it that way too" is not an excuse for adding unsafe/non-robust behavior to musl. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.