Re: libltdl vs System.loadLibrary

[Alexandre Oliva <aoliva at redhat dot com>]

On Nov  5, 2002, Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com> wrote:
   ^^^^^^^^^^^^ Jeez, this was a *long* time ago! :-)

>>>>>> "Anthony" == Anthony Green <green at redhat dot com> writes:
Anthony> What does libltdl buy us beyond ldopen/ldclose?  Could we
Anthony> just remove it?

> I chose it early on.  I thought it would solve dlopen portability
> problems for us.  (And maybe it does and we haven't noticed :-)
> Alexandre Oliva (CCd) may have insight on the pros and cons of this
> library.

I think the only portability wins would be on HP-UX and MS-Windows
(and maybe Mac OS X, I'm not sure about this; it's been a long time
:-).  Oh, and any platforms that don't support dynamic linking, that
dlpreopen emulates nicely, up to a point.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                 aoliva at {redhat dot com, gcc.gnu.org}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva at {lsd dot ic dot unicamp dot br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer