From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23937 invoked by alias); 6 Nov 2002 04:04:41 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-hacker-help@sources.redhat.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-hacker-owner@sources.redhat.com Received: (qmail 23920 invoked from network); 6 Nov 2002 04:04:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO gateway.sf.frob.com) (64.163.212.31) by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 6 Nov 2002 04:04:40 -0000 Received: from magilla.sf.frob.com (magilla.sf.frob.com [198.49.250.228]) by gateway.sf.frob.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0E7C357E; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 20:04:39 -0800 (PST) Received: (from roland@localhost) by magilla.sf.frob.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id gA644dK18292; Tue, 5 Nov 2002 20:04:39 -0800 Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2002 20:04:00 -0000 Message-Id: <200211060404.gA644dK18292@magilla.sf.frob.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: Roland McGrath To: Jakub Jelinek Cc: Ulrich Drepper , Glibc hackers Subject: Re: [PATCH] Honor executables DT_RUNPATH for dlopen In-Reply-To: Jakub Jelinek's message of Thursday, 10 October 2002 16:21:55 +0200 <20021010162155.Y3451@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz> X-Windows: dissatisfaction guaranteed. X-SW-Source: 2002-11/txt/msg00011.txt.bz2 That change is not correct. The ELF spec says that DT_RUNPATH applies to "only the immediate dependencies of the executable or shared object containing the DT_RUNPATH entry." I'm not aware of anything that specifies dlopen in enough detail that it couldn't do whatever it likes. But it seems consistent with the spec for dlopen not to be affected by any DT_RUNPATH (except for dependencies being affected by a DT_RUNPATH within a dlopen'd dependent object). The application or library can use whatever prefix it put in its DT_RUNPATH on the strings it passes to dlopen directly.