[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: tests on AIX 5

From: Bob Friesenhahn
Subject: Re: tests on AIX 5
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 2004 10:15:49 -0600 (CST)

On Tue, 16 Nov 2004, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
supports many non-portable behaviors.  In order to support its
portability objective, libltdl should support the lowest (acceptable)
common denominator functionality, and this functionality should be

This is *not* a sane requirement IMVHO.  This *is* a matter which can be
argued about.  Might do it now, while many new things are envisioned
and argued anyway:

I think we should very much encourage using the portable behavior.
But: If we never allow any features of the not-available-on-100% of all
obsolete and non-obsolete systems, then Libtool is doomed to fail.
Fail in the sense that it will actually become worthless over time.

You missed my use of the term "acceptable". By acceptable I mean that we would analyze the capabilities of modern operating systems (the ones that 99% of the people use) and find the common subset. There is a certain acceptable limit of functionality which should be present. Some capabilities may be eliminated because it is decided that they create situations where the software may fail arbitrarily or don't match the objectives of libtool/libltdl. A matrix of supported capabilities would be listed in the documentation. The libltdl tests would validate the capabilities listed in this matrix.

A test failed because libltdl failed to locate a symbol from within the *main* executable. If libltdl was executed from a shared library or module, I would be quite happy if it failed to locate a symbol from within the *main* executable unless the main executable was explicitly loaded. If it did locate a symbol from the main exectable, then that indicates that symbols from the main executable may be polluting the namespace, which could lead to wrong behavior.

Bob Friesenhahn

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]