Compatability: dlinfo needed for kerberos

Compatability: dlinfo needed for kerberos

[Isaac Dunham]

MIT Kerberos 5 1.10.2 and OpenSSL want dlinfo; while OpenSSL supports
systems without dlinfo, Kerberos requires it on any non-Windows
systems (Windows has an equivalent API).
AFAICT the file that it occurs in must be built.

Isaac Dunham

Re: Compatability: dlinfo needed for kerberos

[orc]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 06:35:42 -0700
Isaac Dunham <idunham@lavabit.com> wrote:

> MIT Kerberos 5 1.10.2 and OpenSSL want dlinfo; while OpenSSL supports
> systems without dlinfo, Kerberos requires it on any non-Windows
> systems (Windows has an equivalent API).
> AFAICT the file that it occurs in must be built.
> 
> Isaac Dunham
> 

+ OpenSSL required dladdr on my musl test system for dynamic engine
loading (but no dlinfo requirement seen).

Re: Compatability: dlinfo needed for kerberos

[Rich Felker]

On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 06:35:42AM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> MIT Kerberos 5 1.10.2 and OpenSSL want dlinfo; while OpenSSL supports
> systems without dlinfo, Kerberos requires it on any non-Windows
> systems (Windows has an equivalent API).
> AFAICT the file that it occurs in must be built.

Have you looked into what it's used for? I'm not 100% rejecting it at
this time, but I really dislike the dlinfo interface. It exposes a lot
of internals that applications should not be inspecting and seems to
require us to keep around extra bloated data structures that are not
otherwise needed.

Rich

Re: Compatability: dlinfo needed for kerberos

[Isaac Dunham]

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 10:24:06 -0400
Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx> wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2012 at 06:35:42AM -0700, Isaac Dunham wrote:
> > MIT Kerberos 5 1.10.2 and OpenSSL want dlinfo; while OpenSSL
> > supports systems without dlinfo, Kerberos requires it on any
> > non-Windows systems (Windows has an equivalent API).
> > AFAICT the file that it occurs in must be built.
(As noted by orc, it isn't strictly dlinfo that openssl needs, but
dladdr; all the musl distros have a patch to disable this)
> Have you looked into what it's used for? I'm not 100% rejecting it at
> this time, but I really dislike the dlinfo interface. It exposes a lot
> of internals that applications should not be inspecting and seems to
> require us to keep around extra bloated data structures that are not
> otherwise needed.
Here, the function name says it all:
module_get_filename_for_symbol
It occurs in src/util/verto/module.c in Kerberos 5 1.10.2. 
I may email the Kerberos ml to inquire about this...

Isaac Dunham