Please stop top-posting. It makes it very hard to reply to you. On 10/21/2010 09:01 PM, Alexey Skidanov wrote: > Actually, you claim that if some static library defines some global variable, > then it should NOT be linked with more then one shared library. In the same process, yes. That's absolutely true. > That is, if you > have the dependencies tree like in my example then you have a problem. Think > about such static library is third party library where I can't change the code. > > Regarding the ODR. You are absolutly right. But what about a MULTIPLE variable > initialization. Is it correct behaviour according to standard? I don't know what you mean by a "MULTIPLE variable initialization". Andrew. > Alexey > ________________________________ > From: Andrew Haley <aph@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: noloader@xxxxxxxxx > Cc: Alexey Skidanov <Alexey.Skidanov@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx; > skidanovalexey@xxxxxxxxx > Sent: Thu, October 21, 2010 7:37:25 PM > Subject: Re: Global variable in static library - double free or corruption error > > On 10/21/2010 05:23 PM, Jeffrey Walton wrote: >>> that there can only ever be one definition of a symbol in a program, and >>> UNIX has always merged multiple definitions to achieve this >> Does the rule include that gloabl object destructors are to run on >> every unload, or the last/final unload or last call to dlclose (when >> the shared object gets unmapped)? > > I suspect that Bad Things would happen. :-) > > As far as I know, they are run, and if you have two definitions > of some object with a destructor, then you violate the ODR rule, > and it's all your fault! > >> Many folks don't expect their >> objects will be pulled out from under them until the last unload. It >> seems like a reasonable expectation to me. > > Sure, but you break the rules, you get to keep all the pieces. > > Andrew. > > > >
