Subject: Re: HEADS UP: migration to fully dynamic linked "base" system
To: Jason R Thorpe <>
From: Johnny Billquist <>
List: current-users
Date: 08/26/2002 20:34:54
On Mon, 26 Aug 2002, Jason R Thorpe wrote:

> On Mon, Aug 26, 2002 at 08:20:05PM +0200, Lennart Augustsson wrote:
>  > Why should using dlopen() require that the executable is dynamically
>  > linked?  Requiring this is, imo, broken.  If using dlopen() is the
>  > reason to go to a dynamically linked /bin, then fix dlopen() instead.
> dlopen() CANNOT be fixed in this case:
> 	1. In ELF, the kernel runs a dynamic executable my mapping the
> 	   interpreter (ld.elf_so), and passing info about the program
> 	   to it.  The interpreter then maps stuff, and jumps into the
> 	   program.
> 	2. The interpreter provides dlopen(), etc.
> A statically-linked executable has no interpreter, and thus has no
> dlopen().

Thank you, you just answered a question I wrote 10 seconds ago. :-)

However, what's preventing us from writing a separate dlopen() function
that can live in the statically linked binary?

Does the interpreter do or know things that we cannot possibly know


Johnny Billquist                  || "I'm on a bus
                                  ||  on a psychedelic trip
email:           ||  Reading murder books
pdp is alive!                     ||  tryin' to stay hip" - B. Idol