[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: cmod-play 1 available + modsup.h additions
From: |
Marius Vollmer |
Subject: |
Re: cmod-play 1 available + modsup.h additions |
Date: |
Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:29:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
Ludovic Courtès <address@hidden> writes:
> Also, will this be part of Guile 1.6.x too?
In 1.6 and going forward, 'compiled modules' are done differently. A
'use-modules' statement, say, does not directly load a shared library.
Instead, it loads a small Scheme wrapper file that then in turn loads
the shared library via 'load-extension'. That way, modules can depend
on one another and load each other in the same way used for Scheme
code.
A second problem is that a shared library might depend on a shared
library that is not asssociated with a module. For example, the
module (gtk-1.2 gtk) loads libguile-gtk-1.2.so (via load-extension)
and libguile-gtk-1.2.so depends on libgtk.so which in turn depends on
libgdk.so, etc. The (gtk-1.2 gtk) module only loads
libguile-gtk-1.2.so and the remaining libs need to be loaded
automatically. This does indeed happen with libltdl (which is used by
Guile).
As far as I understand it, Thien's proposal does only solve the first
problem, that of modules depending on each other, but not the second
one, that of a shared library depending on another shared library that
is not used by/as a module.
The first problem does not exist in 1.6 since shared libraries are not
modules anylonger, the second one does not exist since libltdl handles
it already correctly.
( 1.6 still supports loading shared libraries as modules, but
deprecates it. )
--
GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405
- cmod-play 1 available + modsup.h additions, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2003/11/13
- Re: cmod-play 1 available + modsup.h additions, Marius Vollmer, 2003/11/14
- Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Roland Orre, 2003/11/14
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Ludovic Courtès, 2003/11/14
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Roland Orre, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Ludovic Courtès, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Marius Vollmer, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Marius Vollmer, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Marius Vollmer, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Allister MacLeod, 2003/11/17
- Re: Does anyone have a better scm_string_hash ?, Marius Vollmer, 2003/11/17