[vlc-devel] [patch] Alter symbol-globalising dlopen(RTLD_NOLOAD) call to succeed

[jpd at m2x.nl]

On Fri, February 13, 2009 3:13 pm, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> On Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:45:10 +0100 (CET), jpd at m2x.nl wrote:
>> I must confess that I have no idea why linking plugins against libvlccore
>> or the existence of revision.c is in any way or form a factor in calling
>> dlsym on something else entirely.
>
> revision.c, by essence, needs to be regenerated pretty much all the time.
> In theory, it depends on every single file in the source repository. In
> practice, the ony realistic way to implement that, is  to be regenerate the
> file every time.
[big snip]
>
> *But*, inspite of my objections, M2X has on _several_ occasions brought
> revision.c back into the build.

I will not comment on the merits of arguments either way, but this
explanation still fails to impress me with the relation, if any, of that
topic to the patch I originally submitted and the issues you found with
it but are hard pressed to discuss in detail.


>> I have to focus on the webbrowser plugins for the moment, not on
>> loader trickery for what appear to be wilfully nonstandard cases.
>
> That's typical M2X behavior. Focus on short term business-focused hacks,
> and put the fixing and long-term maintainance burden on volunteer
> developpers. And then blame me as I try to fix their bugs. Frankly, I have
> really had it with your employer.

I somehow must have missed your rebuttal of my argument that to the
best of my understanding that "fix" does no such thing and in fact
breaks much-desired functionality elsewhere. I daresay the latter, in
casu a working webbrowser plugin for the 1.0 release, has importance if
not directly to the aestethics of the code, at least to the long-term
viability of the project.

That you apparently cannot find it in you to separate proposed bugfixes
from your personal issues with my employer I regret. However, I can but
wish you would work them out with him instead of taking them to me.