Re: -rpath with libtool and Debian Linux

[John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org>]

On Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 07:23:07PM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote:

> If you do want to be able to freely move libraries around, -rpath must 
> be forbidden.  If -rpath is available for users, you can't move
> libraries around and expect things to work.

So, because the user is clueless and uses a bad option, we should cripple
the system?

By that logic, we ought to remove the following commands:

 * cat
   (user could run cat /dev/zero > /dev/hda, messing up their HD in the near
    future)
 * dd
   (user could run dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/hda)
 * fdisk
   (user could mess up their partition table in the future)
 * echo
   (user could echo stuff to /dev/hda)
 * bash
   (has a built-in echo)
 * gcc
   (offers -rpath, which can mess up their executables in the future.

I simply don't follow.  People should not just try stuff because "Gee, I
wonder what this will do?!"  It is not our fault if sombody is curious and
incorrectly uses -rpath, just as it is not our fault if somebody is curious
and inadvertantly cat's /dev/zero over their hard disk.

> But isn't this exactly what the packaging systems are trying to avoid,
> i.e., that people have to compile systems on their own?  And then, how
> could I make sure that my test build works exactly as the pre-compiled 
> upgrade, so that I could use the packaging system for the update?

Oh, so you're saying that the admin controls the default versions for
people, then?  Gee, sounds like what we have now.