[openbeosnetteam] Re: libnetwork.so vs. libsocket.so/libbind.so

Philippe Houdoin <philippe.houdoin@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > does anybody the rationale behind going for libnetwork.so?
> > Is it only there to be able to have a fresh start? If so, I'd 
> > prefer
> > going the libsocket.so/libbind.so route in our stack - even though 
> > I
> > like libnetwork.so better, I can't stand the code duplication and
> > library cluttering for almost nothing.
> The best would be to dynamically detect the ABI interface between R5, 
> BONE and
> our ABI at runtime, not compile time.

Which would be possible, when we extend the loader's (private) API a 
bit.

> If we want to continue the BeOS Kit way, I don't see why we should 
> split the
> *official* networking kit into several libraries (libnet.so & 
> libnetapi.so for
> R5, libsocket.so, libbind.so & libbnetapi.so for BONE) but just put 
> them in one
> single library: libnet[work].so.

Since I'm not that happy with libnetapi.so, I wouldn't mind put that 
one aside (and eventually put a new one into libnetwork.so some day), 
but I definitely agree with that idea.

> This kind of mess should be 3rd party opportunity only ;-)

Even they should leave /system/lib/ alone :-)

> > Maybe I should see if our loader could support having both 
> > libsocket.so
> > and libbind.so symlink to the one and only libnetwork.so instead.
> That trick works under R5, AFAIK. I use it everytime to switch 
> between Mesa3D
> libGL.so libraries... And I fail to see why we should NOT support it 
> under
> Haiku, whatever the libraries. Network-related or not.

It works under BeOS as well as Haiku - but, currently under both 
systems, the initialization/termination code is called twice (for the 
same image)!
I tested under Linux as well, and there, the loader is smart enough to 
do that just once :-)

Bye,
   Axel.

Other related posts: