Re: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:01:09PM +0100, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> David Z Maze <dmaze@debian.org> writes:
>
> To explain my outburst: Proper use of rpath is a hobby horse of mine,
> as I've spent a lot of time with Solaris, trying to get applications
> and libraries coming from Linux to set it properly. An unpriveleged
> user can not install large suites of software like GNOME or KDE
> without rpath, be it on Linux or Solaris. libtool has eventually made
> this mostly work. The messages implied that libtool was broken to add
> rpath, and needed fixing. I vehemently oppose that. Patching libtool
> in debian/rules is fine with me, though :-)
Uh? Solaris has not ld.so.conf but you can set $LD_LIBRARY_PATH in the
user environment to have all working perfectly. This is a must in almost
all the Unix installation manuals I saw in the last ten years for
any commercial or free software.
There is no real reason to have a so-linking path builtin in executables.
Linux has ld.so.conf and this is a good reason to avoid rpath,-R,
LD_LIBRARY_PATH, LD_RUN_PATH and any other trick of this kind.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: