Re: APT 0.1.9 (yes, 0.1.9!) is released!
Richard Braakman <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Ossama Othman wrote:
> > > * -rpath nastiness from libtool is now patched from within configure.in
> > Can someone explain again why "-rpath" is such a nasty thing in libtool?
> > Why wouldn't we want paths embedded in a shared library? I guess I need
> > to look at Debian Policy again.
> They caused us many problems when moving from libc5 to libc6,
> because libc5-based programs with "rpath /usr/lib" insisted in
> looking in /usr/lib for their libraries -- which, of course, had the
> libc6 versions. We want to avoid that headache the next time.
It's not just that, but also even just when sonames change. apt's
libtool usage actually needed fixed because apt couldn't be compiled
on cookie-monster (m68k's build daemon #2) without getting a
dependency on two libstdc++'s.
-rpath is evil. Don't question it, don't think about it, just run
screaming in the other direction.