dumb libcinfig?

[bblochl2-2]

I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the net for GNU ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I was surprised how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings were, that he started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)

The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2 Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.

Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)

To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.

Regards

BB

[Jeremy Tregunna-2]

I have answered this question in #Linux on efnet's irc network from 94  
until 98 when I left that channel. And since in various other irc  
channels.

In addition, as with all FSF copyrighted software a copyright  
assignment and waiver mist be signed and completed before any patches  
can make it into a GNU project. I have one on file from about 2001 or  
so, maybe a bit later to replace GNUstep's NSHost and related  
components to introduce a dual v4/v6 support into the networking code  
which I backed out on due to copyright concerns. I don't like having  
to sign away rights to contribute my time for free to any project.  
Different story if I'm being paid though.

The GNU ld problem is one that should go away and should have a long  
time ago, but like I say, I won't give up my rights to make it happen.

Regards,

Jeremy Tregunna
Mobile: [phone]

Sent from my iPhone

On 2009-06-18, at 10:44, bblochl2 <bblochl2@...> wrote:

> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I  
> found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8, 2009  
> 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig"  
> as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the net for GNU  
> ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I was surprised  
> how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings were, that he  
> started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy Tregunna in his  
> posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on  
> Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-
> group)
>
> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any  
> leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The  
> CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2  
> Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
>
> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a  
> contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I  
> recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to  
> sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern  
> behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42  
> am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as  
> final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>
> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the  
> weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we  
> all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
>
> Regards
>
> BB
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

[Jeremy Tregunna-2]

On 18-Jun-09, at 10:53 AM, Jeremy Tregunna wrote:

> I have answered this question in #Linux on efnet's irc network from 94
> until 98 when I left that channel. And since in various other irc
> channels.
>
> In addition, as with all FSF copyrighted software a copyright
> assignment and waiver mist be signed and completed before any patches
> can make it into a GNU project. I have one on file from about 2001 or
> so, maybe a bit later to replace GNUstep's NSHost and related
> components to introduce a dual v4/v6 support into the networking code
> which I backed out on due to copyright concerns. I don't like having
> to sign away rights to contribute my time for free to any project.
> Different story if I'm being paid though.
>
> The GNU ld problem is one that should go away and should have a long
> time ago, but like I say, I won't give up my rights to make it happen.

I should clarify more, and while I do not have source code in front of  
me to point out modules and whatnot, a comparison can be done with BSD  
ld as found in FreeBSD as to how library caching happens there versus  
with GNU ld. It will take some digging, and if I have any free time in  
the next few weeks (doubtful, just bought a house) I will dig in and  
take this up with you off list.

Also, sorry for the top post, silly iPhone.

> Regards,
>
> Jeremy Tregunna
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 2009-06-18, at 10:44, bblochl2 <bblochl2@...> wrote:
>
>> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I
>> found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8, 2009
>> 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig"
>> as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the net for GNU
>> ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I was surprised
>> how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings were, that he
>> started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy Tregunna in his
>> posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on
>> Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-
>> group)
>>
>> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any
>> leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The
>> CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2
>> Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
>>
>> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a
>> contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I
>> recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to
>> sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern
>> behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42
>> am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as
>> final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>>
>> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the
>> weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we
>> all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> BB
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Regards,

Jeremy Tregunna
jeremy.tregunna@...

[bblochl2-2]

--- In iolanguage@..., "bblochl2" <bblochl2@...> wrote:

>
> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the net for GNU ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I was surprised how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings were, that he started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>
> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2 Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
>
> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>
> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
>
> Regards
>
> BB
>

I did some more work on that topic in the meantime. I checked the actual package debian list http://packages.debian.org/stable/allpackages and the SUSE-List as well http://en.opensuse.org/Package_List/11.1/GNOME-LiveCD-i686. There is no libconfig-file listed. I also browsed the history and the bug-history of debian as well and found from different postings that that file was removed about 2008. (Indeed there had been some minor weakness reported.)

I do not know if anyone really needs an improvement for that package? ("If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern behaviour.")

So I think that libconfig-chapter is closed - for shure for me.  Let us do some usefull work for that libiovmall-problem.

Regards BB

[Jeremy Tregunna-2]

On 18-Jun-09, at 11:50 AM, bblochl2 wrote:

> --- In iolanguage@..., "bblochl2" <bblochl2@...> wrote:
>>
>> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I  
>> found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8,  
>> 2009 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run  
>> "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the  
>> net for GNU ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I  
>> was surprised how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings  
>> were, that he started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy  
>> Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report:  
>> "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the  
>> iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>>
>> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any  
>> leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The  
>> CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2  
>> Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
>>
>> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a  
>> contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I  
>> recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to  
>> sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern  
>> behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42  
>> am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as  
>> final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>>
>> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the  
>> weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we  
>> all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> BB
>>
>
> I did some more work on that topic in the meantime. I checked the  
> actual package debian list http://packages.debian.org/stable/allpackages 
>  and the SUSE-List as well http://en.opensuse.org/Package_List/11.1/GNOME-LiveCD-i686 
> . There is no libconfig-file listed. I also browsed the history and  
> the bug-history of debian as well and found from different postings  
> that that file was removed about 2008. (Indeed there had been some  
> minor weakness reported.)
>
> I do not know if anyone really needs an improvement for that  
> package? ("If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a  
> patch for more modern behaviour.")
>
> So I think that libconfig-chapter is closed - for shure for me.  Let  
> us do some usefull work for that libiovmall-problem.

I was not talking about libconfig at all, not sure what libconfig is  
to be honest. The ldconfig problem still exists, and will continue to  
be a problem for MANY software libraries for the forseeable future.  
That is the piece of software I take exception to, as there is no need  
for it to be so retarded about new libraries installed into known  
paths. The runtime linker can check those paths for changes compared  
to its cache, invalidate the cache and cache the libraries again, at  
minimal overhead at runtime. (We're talking milliseconds.)

Regards,

Jeremy Tregunna
jeremy.tregunna@...

[dennisf486]

Jeremy, if you don't agree with the FSF's copyright waiver, maybe you can work it from the other end:  lobby the major Linux distributions to change their runtime linker to no longer need to rely on ldconfig.  I bet Canonical would be interested in fixing this on Ubuntu; from there it would likely go upstream into Debian.  (Do Redhat based distros have the same problem?  What about Gentoo?)  If all the major Linux distros fix this, it might shame the GNU project into modernizing it themselves.

Guys, there's no point in beating up on Jeremy over this.  I disagree with his position (I'd just as soon patch in a workaround to run ldconfig in the makefile, and so what if the linker ought to be smarter), but I don't maintain the build - he does.  And I believe him when he says he's been answering this topic since 1994 and would have liked to have patched it but didn't want to sign the copyright waiver to do it - why would anyone make that up?

Jeremy, what do you think of the idea of just echoing "pssst!  run ldconfig dummy!" (not in those words) if a Debian/Linux system is detected?  I mean, just for the purpose of you not having to answer threads like this in the future, right?  :)

To further nudge the discussion back onto practical terms, I want to throw out here that automake's ./configure script exists to solve this very set of problems:  detecting the user's build environment so the right makefile operations get run.  I know automake is crufty and all, but I've always found it to be reliable at configuring my projects for cross platform builds.  Not sure how Io's "trick" of using the vm to in turn build the addons would interact with automake though.

--- In iolanguage@..., Jeremy Tregunna <jeremy.tregunna@...> wrote:

>
>
> On 18-Jun-09, at 11:50 AM, bblochl2 wrote:
>
> > --- In iolanguage@..., "bblochl2" <bblochl2@> wrote:
> >>
> >> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I  
> >> found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8,  
> >> 2009 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run  
> >> "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the  
> >> net for GNU ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I  
> >> was surprised how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings  
> >> were, that he started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy  
> >> Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report:  
> >> "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the  
> >> iolanguage yahoo!-group)
> >>
> >> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any  
> >> leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The  
> >> CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2  
> >> Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
> >>
> >> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a  
> >> contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I  
> >> recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to  
> >> sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern  
> >> behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42  
> >> am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as  
> >> final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
> >>
> >> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the  
> >> weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we  
> >> all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
> >>
> >> Regards
> >>
> >> BB
> >>
> >
> > I did some more work on that topic in the meantime. I checked the  
> > actual package debian list http://packages.debian.org/stable/allpackages 
> >  and the SUSE-List as well http://en.opensuse.org/Package_List/11.1/GNOME-LiveCD-i686 
> > . There is no libconfig-file listed. I also browsed the history and  
> > the bug-history of debian as well and found from different postings  
> > that that file was removed about 2008. (Indeed there had been some  
> > minor weakness reported.)
> >
> > I do not know if anyone really needs an improvement for that  
> > package? ("If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a  
> > patch for more modern behaviour.")
> >
> > So I think that libconfig-chapter is closed - for shure for me.  Let  
> > us do some usefull work for that libiovmall-problem.
>
> I was not talking about libconfig at all, not sure what libconfig is  
> to be honest. The ldconfig problem still exists, and will continue to  
> be a problem for MANY software libraries for the forseeable future.  
> That is the piece of software I take exception to, as there is no need  
> for it to be so retarded about new libraries installed into known  
> paths. The runtime linker can check those paths for changes compared  
> to its cache, invalidate the cache and cache the libraries again, at  
> minimal overhead at runtime. (We're talking milliseconds.)
>
> Regards,
>
> Jeremy Tregunna
> jeremy.tregunna@...
>

[Steve Dekorte]

On 2009-06-18, at 9:16 PM, dennisf486 wrote:
> I'd just as soon patch in a workaround to run ldconfig in the makefile

I'll accept a patch to do that as long as it doesn't creak other  
systems.

- Steve

[Jeremy Tregunna-2]

On 19-Jun-09, at 12:16 AM, dennisf486 wrote:

> Jeremy, if you don't agree with the FSF's copyright waiver, maybe  
> you can work it from the other end:  lobby the major Linux  
> distributions to change their runtime linker to no longer need to  
> rely on ldconfig.  I bet Canonical would be interested in fixing  
> this on Ubuntu; from there it would likely go upstream into Debian.  
> (Do Redhat based distros have the same problem?  What about  
> Gentoo?)  If all the major Linux distros fix this, it might shame  
> the GNU project into modernizing it themselves.

I deal with FreeBSD on a daily basis, and have for some time now. I  
have no desire to lobby anyone to change something that I don't use  
anymore. This affects all GNU ld based systems as well, not just  
Debian and likewise distributions.

> Guys, there's no point in beating up on Jeremy over this.  I  
> disagree with his position (I'd just as soon patch in a workaround  
> to run ldconfig in the makefile, and so what if the linker ought to  
> be smarter), but I don't maintain the build - he does.  And I  
> believe him when he says he's been answering this topic since 1994  
> and would have liked to have patched it but didn't want to sign the  
> copyright waiver to do it - why would anyone make that up?

I don't maintain the build, I've just been using and helping develop  
Io since 2003. As I said before, and I'll say again, I won't sign a  
copyright waiver to contribute code for free to any project.

> Jeremy, what do you think of the idea of just echoing "pssst!  run  
> ldconfig dummy!" (not in those words) if a Debian/Linux system is  
> detected?  I mean, just for the purpose of you not having to answer  
> threads like this in the future, right?  :)

I'm ok with that, but it'd have to come after all the addons are  
built, otherwise it'll get lost in the build logs. It also assumes  
that users actually read what's on their screen when they've been  
returned to the prompt, which I find a 50/50 ratio of who do, to who  
doesn't.

> To further nudge the discussion back onto practical terms, I want to  
> throw out here that automake's ./configure script exists to solve  
> this very set of problems:  detecting the user's build environment  
> so the right makefile operations get run.  I know automake is crufty  
> and all, but I've always found it to be reliable at configuring my  
> projects for cross platform builds.  Not sure how Io's "trick" of  
> using the vm to in turn build the addons would interact with  
> automake though.

I suggested to Steve we move to autoconf before the new build system  
was written, he was not against it, if someone would actively maintain  
it going forward. I couldn't commit to maintaining it for an  
undetermined period of time, as I was working on other projects  
primarily back then.

> --- In iolanguage@..., Jeremy Tregunna  
> <jeremy.tregunna@...> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 18-Jun-09, at 11:50 AM, bblochl2 wrote:
>>
>>> --- In iolanguage@..., "bblochl2" <bblochl2@> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I am always interested in bugs ore faults of componenets, so as I
>>>> found the intersting posting of Jeremy Tregunna from Mon Jun 8,
>>>> 2009 4:42 am (Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run
>>>> "ldconfig" as final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group) I tracked the
>>>> net for GNU ld, ldconfig and Jeremy Tregunna in any combination. I
>>>> was surprised how sparse the tracks and how secret his postings
>>>> were, that he started from 1994 in his own oppinion? (Jeremy
>>>> Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42 am - Bug Report:
>>>> "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as final - on the
>>>> iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>>>>
>>>> The oldest posts are leeching posts from 1989, I could not find any
>>>> leeching or seeding befor 1998? (Topics: netscape problem ... The
>>>> CampGround 17 May 1998 17:37:59 -0000, problem with libXt.so.6... 2
>>>> Feb 1998 08:44:30 -0000) No one from 1994, not even befor 1998.
>>>>
>>>> Well, under that given circumstances I would not wave with a
>>>> contract. The net never foregtets any entry, even ones from 1994. I
>>>> recommend to qualify his statement yourself: "If I didn't have to
>>>> sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a patch for more modern
>>>> behaviour." (Jeremy Tregunna in his posting of Mon Jun 8, 2009 4:42
>>>> am - Bug Report: "make install" on Ubuntu should run "ldconfig" as
>>>> final - on the iolanguage yahoo!-group)
>>>>
>>>> To my regret I found no usable hint for the possible source of the
>>>> weakness in ldconfig and I am still groping in the dark and so we
>>>> all still have to live with the dumb ldconfig.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> BB
>>>>
>>>
>>> I did some more work on that topic in the meantime. I checked the
>>> actual package debian list http://packages.debian.org/stable/allpackages
>>> and the SUSE-List as well http://en.opensuse.org/Package_List/11.1/GNOME-LiveCD-i686
>>> . There is no libconfig-file listed. I also browsed the history and
>>> the bug-history of debian as well and found from different postings
>>> that that file was removed about 2008. (Indeed there had been some
>>> minor weakness reported.)
>>>
>>> I do not know if anyone really needs an improvement for that
>>> package? ("If I didn't have to sign a copyright waiver, I'd submit a
>>> patch for more modern behaviour.")
>>>
>>> So I think that libconfig-chapter is closed - for shure for me.  Let
>>> us do some usefull work for that libiovmall-problem.
>>
>> I was not talking about libconfig at all, not sure what libconfig is
>> to be honest. The ldconfig problem still exists, and will continue to
>> be a problem for MANY software libraries for the forseeable future.
>> That is the piece of software I take exception to, as there is no  
>> need
>> for it to be so retarded about new libraries installed into known
>> paths. The runtime linker can check those paths for changes compared
>> to its cache, invalidate the cache and cache the libraries again, at
>> minimal overhead at runtime. (We're talking milliseconds.)
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Jeremy Tregunna
>> jeremy.tregunna@...
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

Regards,

Jeremy Tregunna
jeremy.tregunna@...