[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: -rpath with libtool and Debian Linux

On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> On Jan 27, 1999, Jules Bean <jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk> wrote:
> > On 27 Jan 1999, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

[watch indenting carefully : I wrote this next bit, of course]
> > In general, it is not useful to have multiple versions of the same
> > package.
> You're probably talking about the single-user workstation model.  I'm
> talking about a networked multi-user model, in which some users need
> (for reasons only they understand :-) particular versions of, say, GNU
> Emacs and gcc installed.

In general, such a situation only arises because of a bug in the software.
That is why I say that, in general, it is not useful.

> > Nonetheless, you are refusing to support it.
> I'm not refusing to support it.  I'm just inclined to avoid having an
> easy-to-use flag to disable explicit hard-coding of library paths
> because:
> 1) it would be hard to make it behave correctly in a portable way (and
> libtool would be useless if it were not for being portable);

Special case-it for linux, if you will.  Libtool has plenty of special
cases as it is.

> 2) it should not be necessary if you play by libtool rules, i.e., you
> pre-declare where libraries are going to be installed and keep them
> there forever (or until they're no longer needed);

We don't want to play by libtool rules.  We don't see that as a sensible

[more information to follow in a separate follow-up]


|  Jelibean aka  | jules@jellybean.co.uk         |  6 Evelyn Rd	       |
|  Jules aka     | jules@debian.org              |  Richmond, Surrey   |
|  Julian Bean   | jmlb2@hermes.cam.ac.uk        |  TW9 2TF *UK*       |
|  War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left.             |
|  When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy.          |

Reply to: