Security fixes for opensaml2 and xmltooling

[Scott Cantor]

Florian Weimer wrote on 2009-09-23:
>> AFAIK, virtual functions aren't inlined, period. If every object file had
>> its own copy, the language would break.
> 
> If there's a single copy, it must be located in a particular .o file
> after the build process.  Certainly, you can tell me which one it
> is. 8-)

It's not about the number of copies, but whether the shared library or the
calling library ends up with the one in the vtable. I had thought the former
(through whatever magic was required to achieve that), but you're saying
it's the latter, and I have no reason to doubt it. I think specifically as
you said because there isn't any .cpp file defining anything else in that
class.

My point was that it's never inlined in the sense of true inlining in C++.
If it's virtual, the language rules ensure that it's only called through the
vtable, never generated inline in the caller.

-- Scott