Re: Report proper errors from the loadlibrary loader.

[Ralf Wildenhues]

Hi Peter,

* Peter Rosin wrote on Mon, Jan 11, 2010 at 09:16:37PM CET:
> Den 2010-01-04 21:48 skrev Ralf Wildenhues:
> >* Peter Rosin wrote on Sat, Jan 02, 2010 at 04:02:57AM CET:
> >>Please consider the attached patch.
> >>
> >>I'm just about to go skiing for a week or so, so I'll push when I get
> >>back if this patch is blessed (knock wood) after I leave...
> >
> >Well happy new year and hope you had a fun time in the snow!
> 
> That I did, and so did the kids, the weather was superb, a bit on the
> cold side though (-20 to -30 degrees C or so). But sunny (the sky was
> clear), no wind and very dry so therefore not unbearable...

Sounds nice!

> >What does this patch and its followup fix get us?  What behavior changed
> >in relation to previous code, and if this is fixing a bug, is there need
> >and chance to test for it?
> 
> Previously the reported error was a plain "can't open the module" or
> "symbol not found", even though the system might have reported why it
> could not open the library or not find the symbol. I would say it's
> about the same as using dlerror when present in the dlopen loader.

Ah, ok.  Thanks.

I'm not too fond of adding new static storage and manipulation (yet
another reason lt_dlopen may not be called concurrently from different
threads), or improved functionality without testsuite exposure that we
really improved.  Further, the documentation I found about GetLastError
states W2K as minimum version, so I hope that you checked that this
works with older Windows as well.  Otherwise, I am fine with the patch.

Thanks,
Ralf