Re: libltdl obscures error messages

[Gary V . Vaughan]

On Tuesday 24 July 2001 9:51 pm, Marius Vollmer wrote:
> Hi,

`Tag Marius,

> I would like to see the error reporting of libltdl be improved.
> Currently, it often happens that a dlopen attempt fails with "file not
> found" although in reality there was some other cause for the failure.

Most definitely.  Believe it or not, things used to be actually much worse.  
But there is still a lot of room for improvement.

> The fix would be to distinguish between "file not found" errors (which
> can be repaired by trying the next candidate), and other errors (which
> should be immediately passed to the caller).

That sounds like a good plan to me.

> I don't have a patch handy since I didn't found my way into the logic
> of ltdl.c yet.  If you agree that something should be done about this
> situation, I'd be glad to try harder.

Some of the call paths are ridiculously over-complicated, but I am gradually 
trying to tease out the knots.  I think I finally reached a place where I 
actually understand what is happening now.  We would be extremely grateful 
for any help you would like to offer...

Cheers,
        Gary.
-- 
  ())_. Gary V. Vaughan     gary@(oranda.demon.co.uk|gnu.org)
  ( '/  Research Scientist  http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk       ,_())____
  / )=  GNU Hacker          http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool  \'      `&
`(_~)_  Tech' Author        http://sources.redhat.com/autobook   =`---d__/