Re: Shared library defines a RPATH
- To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Shared library defines a RPATH
- From: Hamish Moffatt <hamish@debian.org>
- Date: Sat, 3 Aug 2002 01:30:29 +1000
- Message-id: <[🔎] 20020802153029.GA27333@silly.cloud.net.au>
- Mail-followup-to: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
- In-reply-to: <20020729134018.GA3571@nenya.lan>
- References: <E17YUWd-0006P9-00.2002-07-27-17-34-40@mail7.svr.pol.co.uk> <20020728024755.6ab4cc0c.dancer@netfort.gr.jp> <E17YVwK-0001DX-00.2002-07-27-19-05-16@cmailg7.svr.pol.co.uk> <20020728032433.7f6ae47f.dancer@netfort.gr.jp> <877kjgj51e.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> <20020727183643.A12627@khazad-dum> <87y9bvbxnl.fsf@zodiac.debian.net> <20020728171201.GD1816@khazad-dum> <20020728192146.GB25032@debian.org> <20020729134018.GA3571@nenya.lan>
On Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 03:40:18PM +0200, Richard Atterer wrote:
> I'm still convinced that it is fine to use rpath in the following
> case:
>
> - The lib referenced with rpath is in the same package as the
> binaries that make use of it.
> - No other binaries in any other package reference the library.
Can you guarantee that unpackaged programs (eg admin installed programs
in /usr/local) won't use the library? Those programs too will be broken
if the library is relocated later.
Hamish
--
Hamish Moffatt VK3SB <hamish@debian.org> <hamish@cloud.net.au>
Reply to: