On 12/18/05, Mike Shaver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Yes, and this is a limitation of the Linux linking model that I think > should be addressed with some urgency, if it is a goal to make it > easier for ISVs to adopt new Linux-desktop capabilities > aggressively. (I think that it should very much be a goal, since it > has been and continues to be hard for ISVs to integrate well with the > "latest" of a given desktop, without making that a runtime > requirement or exploding out their build-and-ship configs. Our GNOME > file dialog trail of tears is but one example of many, I'm sure.) > > Maybe this is something like relaytool to wrap all the dlopen > machinations necessary to emulate DT_USEFUL, but I bet that gets > extremely exciting for those of us silly enough to use C++. Maybe > this is fixing the toolchain to support a DT_USEFUL-alike directly.
Mike Hearn (who wrote relaytool) said that Debian objected to it (see http://plan99.net/autopackage/Linux_Problems#weak ) because it would defeat Debian's automatic dependency scanning. Presumably implementing DT_USEFUL directly would make them happy. Does anyone have a better link for the definition of DT_USEFUL, by the way, or is this something Mike Hearn came up with himself? - Dan -- Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv _______________________________________________ Desktop_architects mailing list Desktop_architects@lists.osdl.org https://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop_architects
