[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Report proper errors from the loadlibrary loader.
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: Report proper errors from the loadlibrary loader. |
Date: |
Sun, 17 Jan 2010 10:31:21 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-10-28) |
Hi Peter,
* Peter Rosin wrote on Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 09:16:37PM CET:
> Den 2010-01-04 21:48 skrev Ralf Wildenhues:
> >* Peter Rosin wrote on Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 04:02:57AM CET:
> >>Please consider the attached patch.
> >>
> >>I'm just about to go skiing for a week or so, so I'll push when I get
> >>back if this patch is blessed (knock wood) after I leave...
> >
> >Well happy new year and hope you had a fun time in the snow!
>
> That I did, and so did the kids, the weather was superb, a bit on the
> cold side though (-20 to -30 degrees C or so). But sunny (the sky was
> clear), no wind and very dry so therefore not unbearable...
Sounds nice!
> >What does this patch and its followup fix get us? What behavior changed
> >in relation to previous code, and if this is fixing a bug, is there need
> >and chance to test for it?
>
> Previously the reported error was a plain "can't open the module" or
> "symbol not found", even though the system might have reported why it
> could not open the library or not find the symbol. I would say it's
> about the same as using dlerror when present in the dlopen loader.
Ah, ok. Thanks.
I'm not too fond of adding new static storage and manipulation (yet
another reason lt_dlopen may not be called concurrently from different
threads), or improved functionality without testsuite exposure that we
really improved. Further, the documentation I found about GetLastError
states W2K as minimum version, so I hope that you checked that this
works with older Windows as well. Otherwise, I am fine with the patch.
Thanks,
Ralf