RE: Modules dependencies RE: PATCH: zftp/tcp abstraction

["Andrej Borsenkow" <Andrej.Borsenkow@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

>
> Clint Adams wrote:
> > What about just embedding the module dependencies in the module itself?
> > If it could be scanned without loading the module, it would be less
> > messy than maintaining "helper files".
>
> The other advantage of this is that, as Sven has pointed out, we
> can handle
> systems with RTLD_LAZY by loading first and asking questions afterwards.
> The difference between these two methods is then transparent to the user
> --- we don't have extra files on some systems and not on others.
>

Zeram/14786

This was my original suggestion. Zefram had arguments against it.

> At least, I hope we can handle RTLD_LAZY like that... only
> function objects
> can be lazy, data objects can't be, at least under Solaris.  There may be
> cases where we have data dependencies and this won't work.
>

I never liked inter-module data references. Is there any chance we can get
rid of them and replace by wrappers/hooks/callbacks/what-ever? At least, as
long-term goal?

-andrej