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:
>
> > Kjetil Torgrim Homme <kjetilho@linpro.no> writes:
> > > This is a bug in lintian. It should not complain about rpath being
> > > set to directories which are part of Debian.
> >
> > Yes, it should. In this case, imagine GNU libc 3 comes out, Debian
> > decides to migrate to it, and libraries linked against glibc 2 are
> > moved to /usr/i386-glibc2-linux/lib or what not.
>
> Aha, I didn't realize there was that kind of black magic in ld.so
> (documented in ldconfig). Well, then I'd venture that ld.so is
> imperfect. If it knows to ignore certain paths in ld.so.conf, it
> should have sufficient information to ignore those paths when they
> appear as rpath. However, I sincerely hope there will be no more
> major changes in libc, making this feature needless to implement!
> (If the need arises, ld.so with such a patch can be distributed ahead
> of time.)
>
> 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 :-)
Although the latter is a horrible kludge that is going to
break when the internals of libtool change.
Is it not possible for libtool to accept a switch that means "this
library is going to be installed in a system path and I don't want
-rpath set" ? Maybe libtool already has such a switch or will
in a future version? Comments from the libtool maintainer ?
-S
--
by Rocket to the Moon,
by Airplane to the Rocket,
by Taxi to the Airport,
by Frontdoor to the Taxi,
by throwing back the blanket and laying down the legs ...
- They Might Be Giants
Reply to: