dlopen / dlsym issue ?

[jean-marie.verdun at splitted-desktop.org]

Sorry about the mistacke, I am using RTLD_LAZY mode ...

On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, jean-marie.verdun at splitted-desktop.org wrote:

> Hi Joakim,
>
> I basically took a lot of time reading and browsing the source code 
> difference between 0.9.27 and latest snapshot focusing on libdl and ldso 
> stuff. This is something which is easily upgradable as ld-so and libdl are 
> statically linked shared object and are mostly independant of the other parts 
> of the code.
> So I applied some upgrade from 0.9.27 source tree to libdl.c, ldso.c dl-elf.c 
> and elfinterp.c.
> It is hard for me to have a look with 0.9.28 source tree, as there is huge 
> amount of software compiled on top of the 0.9.27. It will take very long time 
> to check that stuff.
> What I could try to do is implementing a shorter implementation of the bug as 
> to provide a reproducer to people having a 0.9.28 library.
> Does anyone know where I could download an ext2 image of a working 0.9.28 
> version ?
> In the meantime here is the DT_NEEDED list from the evas_buffer_test.
>  NEEDED      libevas.so.1
>  NEEDED      libdl.so.0
>  NEEDED      libeet.so.0
>  NEEDED      libjpeg.so.62
>  NEEDED      libfontconfig.so.1
>  NEEDED      libfreetype.so.6
>  NEEDED      libz.so.1
>  NEEDED      libexpat.so.0
>  NEEDED      libm.so.0
>  NEEDED      libc.so.0
> but it is a normal behavior not seeing in this output any module.so shared 
> object as they are automatically discovered during the execution and dlopen 
> is called directly by the application itself.
>
> Regarding RTLD_XXX I used the fault value and RTLD_NEXT as handle without too 
> much success on this.
>
> Jm
>
> On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
>
>> 
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am using uClibc 0.97 as a test plateform to build a
>>> lightweight graphical environment. I am trying to port on top
>>> of a buildroot environment Enlightenment DR17
>>> (http://www.enlightenment.org) which is under heavy
>> 
>> .97(I assume this is really 0.9.27) is very old and lots has happened since 
>> then(in ldso as well).
>> I think you should try both 0.9.28 and current SVN.
>> If that doesn't work, show me the the RTLD_XX flags you are using and make 
>> sure
>> that the .so libs has all dependencies in their DT_NEEDED list.
>> 
>>> 
>>> I have included into my 0.97 source tree the lates ldso tree
>>> from the CVS but without major success.
>> 
>> Don't see how you can just rip out the ldso sub tree and make that work 
>> with current
>> SVN. What did you do?
>> 
>> 
>