Re: What hack in ld.so?
On Feb 1, 1999, Bernard Dautrevaux <DAUTREVAUX@microprocess.com> wrote:
> The problem is that I want to be able to obtain with libtool the
> same service I can obtain usually without it (although with a lot
> more difficulties): Build shared libraries and executables, that
> will work on various libc5 or libc6 based Linux distributions (as
> well as, as far as I'm concerned, on Solaris, hpUX, AIX and
> WindowsNT :-))
You already can. However, because of the unfortunate choice of the
Debian maintainers of replacing libraries with incompatible versions
and failing to complete the ld.so hack that would have worked around
this problem, you have to avoid hard-coding /lib, /usr/lib and
/usr/X11R6/lib in your programs, and the only way you can currently do
this is by:
1) using the script I have posted that modifies libtool so as not to
hard-code any rpath at all; or
2) use another directory as your library directory, such as
/usr/microprocess/lib
> If I'me pretty sure everything will work by default, without using
> -rpath, let me do it this way. The package builder is the one that
> knows, not Alexandre
Agreed. I'm waiting for a patch that implements hard-coding exclusion
of directories that are searched by default.
> PS. Anyway Alexandre you've made a great job with libtool
Thank Gordon, not me. I fell like if all I was able to do was to
start a war against one of our greatest users :-(
> ; why I'm a bit upset here is that I have the feeling that I will
> *not* be able to use this marvelous tool that is libtool...
I'm pretty sure we'll be able to work it out :-)
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.dcc.unicamp.br/~oliva aoliva@{acm.org}
oliva@{dcc.unicamp.br,gnu.org,egcs.cygnus.com,samba.org}
Universidade Estadual de Campinas, SP, Brasil
Reply to: