Re: [PATCH]: Re: [Nautilus-list] Re: must not ship Nautilus 1.0.4 until we fix FAM support

[Frederic Crozat <fcrozat mandrakesoft com>]

Le 17 Jun 2001 22:49:42 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak a écrit :
> On 17Jun2001 11:58PM (+0200), Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:
> > Maciej Stachowiak <mjs noisehavoc org> writes:
> > 
> > > On 17Jun2001 01:41PM (+0200), Yoann Vandoorselaere wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > [Put Ramiro in CC for approval]
> > > > 
> > > > The problem was the wrong assumption that g_module_build_path() would 
> > > > lookup the module for you. It does not.   
> > > > 
> > > > Can I commit ?
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > Hi Yoann,
> > > 
> > > Your patch is not correct. g_module_build_path will result in a name
> > > like "libfam.so", which should get looked up in LD_LIBRARY_PATH and
> > > the system hardcoded library locations by g_module_open (). 
> > 
> > This is wrong.
> > In several distribution, there is only a .so if you installed the
> > developpement package. This patch permit to lookup libfam.so.*.
> > 
> 
> Yeah, I'm just explaining what it does. I agree that relying on a
> devel package is wrong, but your change is wrong in even more serious
> ways.
> 
> > > Your patch
> > > will look up the library only in "/usr" and "/usr/lib", 
> > 
> > You mean /usr/local/lib & /usr/lib
> > 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> > > which is wrong
> > > when you have fam built in a custom prefix (as for example I do)
> > 
> > This imply adding a configuration option to Nautilus to tell where
> > the fam library is...
>  
> The patch should search the same path that dlopen() would. I'm not
> sure if this is possible to do in a totally portable way though. But I
> expect shared objects to be found when I list their directory in
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
> 
> > > , in
> > > addition to unnecessarily scanning a bunch of huge directories.
> > 
> > We don't have the choise. Please read the rest of the thread.
> > We need this lookup.
> 
> I don't think it's necessary. I think you could try loading
> "libfam.so.0", and then "fam" expanded by gmodule internally (so it
> adds the system-specific prefix) if that fails would do the trick.


I'm wondering : why we don't switch to using libtool dlopen system :
libltdl ? Since the main advantage of this system is to use .la to point
to correct library ...


-- 
Frédéric Crozat
MandrakeSoft