This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: A per-user or per-application ld.so.cache?
- From: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- To: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at redhat dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, Ben Woodard <woodard at redhat dot com>
- Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 21:25:48 +0100
- Subject: Re: A per-user or per-application ld.so.cache?
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <56B8E105 dot 8030906 at redhat dot com> <56B8E810 dot 1040609 at redhat dot com> <56B8F860 dot 6060707 at redhat dot com>
On 02/08/2016 09:19 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> Why would a long-lived process that uses dlopen fail to benefit from an
> on-disk cache?
It's not worth the complexity. (On top of the SUID issue already
mentioned, there is also the question of cache invalidation.) With
long-living processes, you could just read in the a designated list of
directories at startup and use that to seed an ephemeral cache. Hence
my question about the directory layout.
> Would you mind expanding on your concern that the solution would not work?
It would work, it's just more difficult to use.
Florian