From: Reini U. <ru...@x-...> - 2002-04-09 12:16:13
|
"Hoehle, Joerg-Cyril" schrieb: > Sam wrote: > > IIUC, libltdl (part of GNU libtool) is exactly that: > I went to > http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool/manual.html#Using%20libltdl > > I liked that: > o it says "a small C source file" > o lt_dlopen does reference counting itself, whereas FOREIGN.D > (currently AMIGAOS only) implements its own lib-handle factory > via O(foreign_libraries) to avoid multiple opens. > > I felt it's a little over-engineered for my purpose. It provides 16 functions, search-path, its own module concept and more. true. > > * libtool's dlpreopen > I don't have plans to incorporate a thing which has yet again it's own module creation convention (modulename_LTX_ prefix to symbols). hmm, but not that complicated. since libtldl seems to support more platforms in the long run, I would vote for libtldl. > > > This is GNU libltdl, a system independent dlopen wrapper for > > GNU libtool. > [many platforms ...] > > * load_add_on (BeOS) > > * GNU DLD (emulates dynamic linking for static libraries) > > I guess it's probably as easy to integrate as sysdll.c. And it already contains autoconf stuff for > UNIX. Wait and see what users report. IMHO the main advantage of the xemacs code over libtldl is the more liberal license :) but since rms forced bruno to use the GPL we don't need to care. -- Reini Urban http://xarch.tu-graz.ac.at/home/rurban/ |