Re: Bug in dlsym() (scope problem(?) & RTLD_NEXT problem)

[Ulrich Drepper <drepper@cygnus.com>]

Kars de Jong <jongk@cs.utwente.nl> writes:

> 	The 2 printed pointers should not be the same. They are, however, for
> 	both methods. I tested this on a i586-pc-linux-gnu platform too.
> Fix:
> 	Nope, sorry. It might be due to the fact that write is a weak symbol
> 	in the C library. It would be best to use RTLD_NEXT anyway, to
> 	avoid version problems. But since that's broken as well...

The values for RTLD_NEXT are not the same with gilbc 2.1.  There are
many known problems in glibc 2.0's ld.so which mostly will not be fixed.

I have to investigate how the dlopen() method finds the local
definition but I guess you are right it's because of write being weak
in libc.  The question is: is this the right way?  I would say yes
(i.e., no error), since dlsym should work the same way as an implicit
lookup through PLT would do it.

-- 
---------------.      drepper at gnu.org  ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Cygnus Solutions `--' drepper at cygnus.com   `------------------------