[16998] in Kerberos_V5_Development
Re: : Why are we using libverto again
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nico Williams)
Thu Jul 7 15:20:47 2011
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1310063691.16598.22.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 7 Jul 2011 14:20:09 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOj4_exyfS3a1e0Hfd-JO7EM_Tw4F-Wpek+AaEsxFCrLWg@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Nathaniel McCallum <npmccallum@redhat.com>
Cc: Sam Hartman <hartmans@mit.edu>, "krbdev@mit.edu" <krbdev@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: krbdev-bounces@mit.edu
Actually, I would say that my biggest concern has to do with signals,
which is where one of the uses of dladdr() comes into play. If two
pieces of code are setting signal handlers, they'd better take care to
stack atop any previously set handlers for those signals. Preferably
there will be only one piece of code setting signal handlers, but
while that can be enforced in the KDC, it will be impossible to do so
in a library (libkdc, libgss, ...). To me this means that you simply
cannot dlclose() the libverto providers if they ever set any signal
handlers. I'm willing to live with a dl handle leak.
Nico
--
_______________________________________________
krbdev mailing list krbdev@mit.edu
https://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/krbdev
