X-Recipient:	archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-SWARE-Spam-Status:	No, hits=-1.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By:	sourceware.org
Message-ID:	<COL102-W129694F48432AD17A46125B5B30@phx.gbl>
From:	Karl M <karlm30 AT hotmail DOT com>
To:	<cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
Subject:	RE: Shall dlopen("foo") succeeed if only "foo.dll" exists?
Date:	Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:55:58 -0800
In-Reply-To:	<4AEF5B7C.90600@cygwin.com>
References:	<20091102164807 DOT GA2897 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <4AEF305E DOT 1010105 AT cygwin DOT com>
X-IsSubscribed:	yes
Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id:	<cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

  <20091102203348 DOT GC6836 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de>

  <4AEF5B7C DOT 90600 AT cygwin DOT com>
 
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0


> Date: Mon=2C 2 Nov 2009 17:21:48 -0500
> From: Larry Hall
> Subject: Re: Shall dlopen("foo") succeeed if only "foo.dll" exists?
>
> On 11/02/2009 03:33 PM=2C Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On Nov 2 14:17=2C Larry Hall (Cygwin) wrote:
>>> On 11/02/2009 11:48 AM=2C Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> For 1.7 our choice is to keep dlopen() checking for the .dll suffix to
>>>> be more Windows-like=2C or to be more Linux-like by dropping the check=
 for
>>>> the .dll suffix so that dlopen() fails if the filename isn't specified
>>>> fully.
>>>
>>> OK=2C I'll admit I'm responding with a question without actually lookin=
g at the
>>> code and so one can feel free to ignore me. However the thought that ca=
me
>>> to my mind is=2C should it really matter if dlopen() checks? What does =
the check
>>> give us that just passing the name along to LoadLibrary() doesn't? At f=
irst
>>> impression=2C doing the check just prematurely rejects names without
>>> the DLL suffix
>>> that would otherwise be accepted by Windows. Since there's a source
>>> level change
>>> that (typically) needs to happen to make the code work on Windows as op=
posed
>>> to Linux/Unix=2C what benefit are we getting from this added check?
>>
>> Good question=2C that's exactly why I'm asking.
>>
>> Answer: Nothing but *maybe* a less surprising behaviour in terms of
>> POSIX compatibility. Allowing automatic file extension is not part of
>> the standards and not even mentioned as a possible option. Sure=2C if
>> that's nothing to worry about=2C we can stick to the current behaviour.
>
> Ah=2C now that's starting to ring a bell. OK=2C I understand why it was p=
ut in.
>
> I guess I would come down on the side that we're stuck with Windows
> implementation here (OK=2C not entirely true but...) so trying to circumv=
ent
> something that Windows allows probably just makes things more difficult.
> For instance=2C going back to my comment about the need to make a source
> level change here anyway=2C if we don't do checking in dlopen()=2C such a
> change could be avoided. I'm thinking of a case where foo.so is the Linux
> name and the makefile is altered (instead) to generate foo.so.dll for
> Cygwin. OK=2C I expect this isn't going to be the average case by any
> stretch of the imagination but it still seems like it's a nice "feature" =
that
> someone might want to leverage. The only advantage I can see to leaving
> the current checks in place is to be more dogged in our attempts to be
> POSIX compliant. I don't object to POSIX but in this case=2C I'm wonderin=
g
> if it really doesn't have any merit.
>
But this does not seem to be about POSIX compliance=2C insted it seems (to =
me)
to be about non-POSIX non-compliance=2C for which we have no requirement.

...Karl 		 	   		 =20
_________________________________________________________________
Bing brings you maps=2C menus=2C and reviews organized in one place.
http://www.bing.com/search?q=3Drestaurants&form=3DMFESRP&publ=3DWLHMTAG&cre=
a=3DTEXT_MFESRP_Local_MapsMenu_Resturants_1x1=

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple

- Raw text -