@pmatilai commented on this pull request.
> +/*
+ * Rather than re-implement path searching for shared objects, use
+ * dlmopen(). This will still perform initialization and finalization
+ * functions, which isn't necessarily safe, so do that in a separate
+ * process.
+ */
+static char *getLibtoolVerFromShLink(const char *filename)
+{
+ char dest[PATH_MAX];
+ int pipefd[2];
+ pid_t cpid;
+
+ if (pipe(pipefd) == -1) {
+ return NULL; // Should this be a fatal error instead?
+ }
+ cpid = fork();
Oh, I seem to have missed the comment indeed. The comment still doesn't explain
*why* it is unsafe to do the processing in a single process, but actually the
better place for the long explanation (basically what you just said here) is in
the commit message.
And okay, it does sound like we do need the fork then.
--
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372#discussion_r1097021319
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Message ID: <rpm-software-management/rpm/pull/2372/review/1284664...@github.com>_______________________________________________
Rpm-maint mailing list
Rpm-maint@lists.rpm.org
http://lists.rpm.org/mailman/listinfo/rpm-maint
