> > Unfortunately, the only reproducible case we have is not exactly small.
> > However, we can give anyone interested full access to the machine and
> > test case where it's occurring [details appended at the bottom of this
> > message].
That message is referring to a slightly different situation:
I am using a statically linked libboost_python.a.
When I wrote the message that David attached I only had a very
complex example. Now I have a significantly simpler one, and this
is what I think is happening:
python -> dlopen ext1.so with statically linked libboost_python.a
python -> dlopen ext2.so with statically linked libboost_python.a
obj1 = ext1.a_type()
obj1 has a member function which will dispatch to one
of two alternative C++ function. In the course of
resolving which C++ function to use an exception is
raised in ext2.so that is meant to be caught in ext1.so.
If both extension modules are imported with RTLD_LOCAL
the exception is not caught correctly. However, when
using RTLD_GLOBAL this works properly.
Considering the discussion in this thread it is now pretty clear
that this behavior is expected.
So... I have just done the step that I should apparently have done
months ago (this is for how long the problem is bugging me):
Compiling our extension modules against a libboost_python.so.
With that my example works even without changing setdlopenflags.
I am obviously learning the hard way here. At least things
are starting to make sense now. And it seems as if RTLD_LOCAL
will work for a shared Boost.Python library.
Thanks for sharing your valuable knowledge about dynamic linking.
Ralf
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4