[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#49232: [PATCH] load-foreign-library: perform substring match on libr
From: |
Sören Tempel |
Subject: |
bug#49232: [PATCH] load-foreign-library: perform substring match on library files |
Date: |
Sat, 20 Aug 2022 15:52:21 +0200 |
Hi,
How do we proceed with this?
I would especially be interested in the "patching" that you do in Guix.
Maybe that would also be a suitable workaround for us on the Alpine side
until this is sorted out properly.
Greetings,
Sören
Sören Tempel <soeren@soeren-tempel.net> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for your feedback, comments below.
>
> Maxime Devos <maximedevos@telenet.be> wrote:
> > Long term, I think it would be ideal for Guile to decide upon a major
> > version (and maybe even location, depending on the choices of the
> > distro) at _compile_ time instead of runtime, not unlike how other
> > compilers work.
>
> Sure, that could work too.
>
> > If the Guile module is being compiled with --rpath, it searches
> > $CROSS_LIBRARY_PATH or $LIBRARY_PATH and encodes the full file name
> > (/usr/lib/.../libguile-... or /gnu/store/.../lib/...) in the .go,
> > which avoids some manual patching we have to do in Guix.
>
> What kind of manual patching do you do on Guix? Could you refer me to
> the code for that? Maybe that's something we could also do on Alpine in
> the meantime.
>
> > IIUC, the string-prefix? search is non-deterministic, which can make
> > debugging complicated when multiple versions are installed.
>
> Well, on Linux readdir(3) file name order depends on the file system
> implementation. Since the algorithm returns the first file with a
> substring match, it depends on the readdir order. As long as the same
> filesystem is used, it should be deterministic.
>
> > I think it would be better to bail out if there are multiple matches
> > instead of a risk of guessing incorrectly.
>
> Many packages provide multiple .so files with different version
> granularity so bailing out if there are multiple substring matches
> doesn't really work. For example, for libgit2 I have the following files
> installed on my system:
>
> $ ls /usr/lib/libgit2*
> /usr/lib/libgit2.so.1.4
> /usr/lib/libgit2.so.1.4.4
>
> Where the former is a symlink to the latter. However, it would be
> possible to collect all substring matches and prioritize them according
> to some algorithm (e.g. alphabetical order). This would also make the
> algorithm independent of the readdir(3) order.
>
> > The prefixing behaviour is also not documented, so some documentation is
> > needed in the manual.
>
> I can add some documentation if there is interest in merging this.
>
> > * Does it go scanning the dir even if libfoo.so could be found?
> > Otherwise, there are some possible performance gains by checking for
> > libfoo.so first -- consider the case where /usr/lib is huge.
>
> Yes, a fast path could be added though you probably really need to have
> a lot of files installed in /usr/lib for this to be worth it.
>
> > * When doing (load-foreign-library "/gnu/store/.../libfoo.so")
> > (absolute file name!), would it search for
> > /gnu/store/.../libfoo.so.N? If so, that would be surprising,
> > especially if libfoo.so.N exists.
>
> Yep, it does. I originally didn't want to modify the handling of
> absolute paths but unfortunately during testing I noticed that Guile
> extensions seem to be loaded with an absolute path and hence don't
> work without the libfoo.so symlink [1].
>
> > * If doing libfoo.so.N, will it search for libfoo.so.N.M?
>
> Yes, since libfoo.so.N is a prefix of libfoo.so.N.M.
>
> > * Does it only apply to the system paths, or also to
> > GUILE_SYSTEM_EXTENSION_PATH, LTDL_LIBRARY_PATH and
> > GUILE_EXTENSION_PATH? The latter would be surprising to me, as
> > versioning is more of a system thing.
>
> If those paths are also searched using the load-foreign-library
> procedure then they are affected by this change. Also, I am not a Guile
> expert but on Alpine, Guile extensions such as guile-reader also ship
> versioned sonames [1].
>
> > * To test it, and avoid breaking things later with future changes to
> > load-foreign-library, could some tests be added?
>
> Probably, though I am not familiar with the Guile test setup and there
> don't seem to be any existing tests for foreign-library.
>
> > * Is this change desirable? I mean, this is an FFI API, so the ABI of
> > the library is rather important. If a Guile module links to
> > libfoo.so, and they had version N in mind, then it's important it
> > doesn't link to N-1 or N+1 instead, because of ABI
> > incompatibilities. As such, to me it seems _good_ that you got some
> > errors, as now you get a reminder to explicitly state which ABI
> > version is needed. (YMMV, and the mileage of the Guile maintainers
> > might vary, etc.)
>
> In my experience, most languages which don't link against shared
> libraries directly but instead load them at run-time don't hardcode ABI
> versions (for example, refer to Python's ctypes.util.find_library).
> Also, the current implementation of load-foreign-library does not force
> you to specify an ABI version but instead loads whatever the libfoo.so
> symlink refers to.
>
> > Also, this seems like a non-trivial change to me, so a copyright line
> > might be in order, unless you did the copyright assignment.
>
> I didn't do any copyright assignment yet but if there is actually any
> interest in merging this then I can do it once we agreed on changes to
> the algorithm.
>
> Greetings,
> Sören
>
> [1]: https://gitlab.alpinelinux.org/alpine/aports/-/issues/12783
- bug#49232: [PATCH] load-foreign-library: perform substring match on library files,
Sören Tempel <=