httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Arliss, Noah" <narl...@netegrity.com>
Subject RE: [PATCH] HPUX static's and Mixing C with C++ modules
Date Mon, 10 Feb 2003 18:51:21 GMT
I understand BIND_NOSTART has been in the code since it was first checked
into apache 1.3. I also understand the desire not to break existing
functionality. I can tell you that BIND_NOSTART prevents any C++ module
developer from being able to take advantage of static initialization. I'd be
more than happy to leave that code be if I had a definative way to enable
dlopen instead of shl_load.

-N

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Orton [mailto:joe@manyfish.co.uk]
Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2003 5:01 AM
To: dev@apr.apache.org; dev@httpd.apache.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] HPUX static's and Mixing C with C++ modules


Hi,

On Fri, Feb 07, 2003 at 12:23:09PM -0500, Arliss, Noah wrote:
> I'll try to clarify things as best I can. First off, BIND_VERBOSE would be
> fantastic. I had to add it in order to get my module to load at all with
> shl_load, even though it still would not function. If there was a good
> reason to remove BIND_VERBOSE that history would be nice to have. The
> shl_load call would look better as: 

BIND_VERBOSE means the library writes error message to whatever file you
happen to have open as fd 2 - which is unacceptable for a library. (the
app may have closed stderr and be using fd 2 for something completely
different).  You get exactly the same error string back via
apr_dso_error() anyway, which is the defined interface for retrieving
the error string.

Changing the call to:

> + shl_t os_handle = shl_load(path, BIND_IMMEDIATE, 0L); 

seems fine to me, FWIW, but as Will says, the BIND_NOSTART has been
there since the code was first checked into Apache 1.3, so there may be
some subtle reason why it's needed.

Regards,

joe

Mime
View raw message