Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 23:29:17 -0700 From: Brad Conroy <technosaurus@...oo.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Concerns about dlclose() behaviour I recently checked out the netsurf-framebuffer package from debian and was bothered that all of the backends were compiled in... thus requiring a bunch of extra dependencies and increasing footprint. I am currently patching it to make the backends modular, but ran into a concern about musl compatibility. libnsfb is set up in such a way that each backend has (static) functions exported in a single struct. With normal dlclose() functionality, I could use dlopen to get a module and run its init function, then if it fails, just dlclose() it and try the next backend (all using the same variable and function names, thus simplifying the implementation) I am thinking this will still work on musl in a way similar to using LD_PRELOAD, but wanted to verify before moving forward since many nsfb users also use musl. R, Brad Conroy
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.