This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: [PATCH][BZ #17250] Static dlopen default library search path fix
- From: "Maciej W. Rozycki" <macro at linux-mips dot org>
- To: Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: Andreas Schwab <schwab at suse dot de>, Roland McGrath <roland at hack dot frob dot com>, Ondřej Bílka <neleai at seznam dot cz>, Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2015 22:52:31 +0100 (BST)
- Subject: Re: [PATCH][BZ #17250] Static dlopen default library search path fix
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1310252347350 dot 12843 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <20140116203847 dot GB20838 at domone dot podge> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1401172303320 dot 4268 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <20140117233957 dot 64E307441B at topped-with-meat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1401271320170 dot 4268 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <alpine dot DEB dot 1 dot 10 dot 1401291054290 dot 4268 at tp dot orcam dot me dot uk> <mvmfv3zxkhk dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <alpine dot LFD dot 2 dot 20 dot 1508041538290 dot 1410 at eddie dot linux-mips dot org> <mvmvbcvvz1b dot fsf at hawking dot suse dot de> <alpine dot LFD dot 2 dot 20 dot 1508041948170 dot 1410 at eddie dot linux-mips dot org> <20150806060657 dot GW26572 at vapier>
On Thu, 6 Aug 2015, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > Umm, thanks. Having looked through the patch again it looks to me like I
> > got confused with the negative `__builtin_expect' expression. My change
> > was not neutral as intended as it's where DF_1_NODEFLIB is *set* that the
> > conditional executes.
> we cc-ed you on it originally ... do you not see bugzilla e-mails ?
> i'm just wondering how to address the visibility aspect.
I checked and I still have the bugzilla e-mails in my mailbox unarchived.
Which means I saw them and marked for later processing. I must have lost
them from my radar then, sorry about that. Last autumn was hectic for me.
In any case pinging does help, as it did this time (thanks, Andreas!).
> > I'm not prepared to properly regression-test a change right away, but
> > meanwhile can you try the below as a proposed fix? Also I'm not sure
> > offhand how to make a test case that covers this issue, but I'll be happy
> > to accept ideas and implement them.
> two were posted to the bug. if you use tests-static in the Makefile,
> should be fairly easy to add to the tree and check the result.
Except that they cover the usual system-installed use case and we run our
test suite over uninstalled libraries. Normally that does not matter, but
here it does. Unless I'm missing something that is, am I?