From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] dhog the corruptor! From: David Gordon Hogan MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <20011113235023.C50A519A4A@mail.cse.psu.edu> Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2001 18:50:20 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 21ed9722-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > This is just for kernel drivers, right? No, it's a general purpose mechanism. It's currently only used for kernel device drivers, but I have my eyes on certain user mode applications that could benefit. > While plan9's non-support of dynamic > linking for arbitrary C programs works just fine, it doesn't seem to work so > well for languages that only load libraries at run time, such as python or > perl (or limbo?). I don't care about python or perl (so shoot me!). But my experiences with limbo have taught me that loadable modules can be a powerful tool. Limbo also has type signatures, which I have no plans to add at this stage. > If the linker can write relocation information, would that > make it easier to write a dlopen()-like function? We're not trying to load actual libraries here, but rather modules of executable code. Said modules will have a single entry point (which can be a struct, as it is for device drivers).