glibc-2.2.5 bug triggered by Java interpreter

Fri Oct 4 07:16:00 GMT 2002

Hi,
On Wed, 2002年10月02日 at 22:25, Tom Tromey wrote:
>> Anyway, it seems reasonable to me for us to chop off the class name at
> the `$' before passing it to dlopen. This gives a little less
> flexibility in naming the .so, but I don't think this loss is very
> important. Any comments on this idea?

The attached patch (untested) does this.
Other ideas are to also turn the '$' into a '-' or to only allow the .so
for a complete package (until now I didn't even know you could also do
it on the class level).
But whatever we decide we should at least document it somewhere. I
looked but couldn't find this in the gcj manual. Is it documented
somewhere else?
Cheers,
Mark
-- 
No.
> Should I include quotations after my reply?
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: natClassLoader.patch
Type: text/x-patch
Size: 1068 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/java/attachments/20021004/3a0ffe88/attachment.bin>