Re: 1.5 release

[Ralf Wildenhues]

* Bob Friesenhahn wrote on Sat, Apr 23, 2005 at 05:13:45PM CEST:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >
> >Suppose, the module libfoo depends on libbar.
> >- main calls lt_dlopen("libfoo")
> >- uses unrelated library libbaz
> >- libbaz dlopens libbar as well
> >- main lt_dlclose("libfoo") leads to dlclose(libbar)
> >- libbaz might still be in use and want to use libbar.
> >
> >You might argue main should have made libbar resident.
> >If so, we should mention that in the docs.
> >Same situation the other way round (lib dlclose()s a module which
> >libltdl still thinks open).
> 
> Ahhh, I see.  But this is not at all close to what the original 
> statement implies.  The original statement causes FUD, and implies 
> that terrible things may happen if a program depends on a library 
> which choses to use a different module loader than libltdl for its own 
> modules.  That is pretty much the same as saying that KDE and Gnome 
> need not apply. :-)

Oooops.  Actually, the "oops" thought occurred to me after your first
response.  I honestly did not think of the far-reaching consequences of
my hastily written words.  :-)

> >8)  Note that use of libltdl and a native dlopening mechanism for the
> >same module within one program is not supported.
> 
> That is much better and makes the failure scenario much more clear. I 
> like this one.

Good.  It's not completely accurate because of the deplib loading, but I
guess it's good enough.  For branch-2-0/HEAD I will try to put this into
the texinfo documentation.

Thank you very much for correcting me on this!
Ralf