Follow

Big hoo-ha about macOS11 not allowing to use dynamically linked libraries by path. You have to use the system cache.

But this is what Windows does for ages (e.g. LoadLibrary).

It's funny that almost no one expands on _why_ this is awful.

· · Web · 1 · 0 · 0

@ruivieira Windows 2000 allowed DLLs to be loaded from the application's path and not just the C:\WIN* directories. Am I missing something?

Also, for things not typically associated with a specific application (e.g., COM classes), you can specify absolute pathnames (e.g., as is found in the registry).

@vertigo If you specified the path, it would restrict to that path. If you just passed the DLL name it seemed to work like macOS11.

But my point was actually about most people audibly gasp at this without explaining why they think it's so terrible.

@ruivieira Oooh, I misunderstood the concern. I thought they were restricting where to find libraries in the filesystem, as Windows 2000 started doing to avoid DLL-hell.

After some more research, it looks like the system .dylib files simply **don't exist** anymore on the filesystem. They're now in some pre-populated, and hopefully read-only, cache somewhere.

From what I read, this only seems to affect system software though; 3rd party apps/dylibs appear to work as they always have.

@vertigo Yeah, sorry should have explained better.

My particular gripe is with all the people piling on the "omg this is the end of macOS" without actually discussing why is it technically bad (especially since it's nothing unheard of).

I'm trying to be neutral. I kinda understand what they're aiming at, but I'm willing to be convinced it's a bad idea.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!