[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: Use lt_dlopenext instead of lt_dlopen (ITS#2437)

What version of libtool are you talking about? In looking at libltdl from
1.4.2 and 1.4.3 I see nothing special about lt_dlopenext. You're always free
to specify a fully-qualified filename; since lt_dlopenext just calls
lt_dlopen anyway, I don't see any particular advantage or limitation in the
current situation. If you want to omit the .la files and load the .so files
directly, you're completely free to do so.

If you can give a better explanation of exactly what you're unable to do with
the current code, please do. Otherwise I think this ITS should be closed.

  -- Howard Chu
  Chief Architect, Symas Corp.       Director, Highland Sun
  http://www.symas.com               http://highlandsun.com/hyc
  Symas: Premier OpenSource Development and Support

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-openldap-bugs@OpenLDAP.org
> [mailto:owner-openldap-bugs@OpenLDAP.org]On Behalf Of sfrost@snowman.net

> Full_Name: Stephen Frost
> Version: HEAD
> OS: Linux
> URL: ftp://ftp.openldap.org/incoming/
> Submission from: (NULL) (
> Please modify the lt_dlopen() in servers/slapd/module.c to be
> lt_dlopenext().
> lt_dlopenext() will check whatever your platform supports,
> including using .la
> where it is present but makes it so that .la files are not
> needed on platforms
> which do not need them.  This will make OpenLDAP more
> flexible by not depending
> on the libtool garbage too (which adds a runtime dependency
> for -dev packages
> under Debian, which can be a real problem).  If you'd like a
> patch I'd be happy
> to supply one.