Re: binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath
"Francesco P. Lovergine" <frankie@debian.org> writes:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2002 at 07:01:09PM +0100, Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
> > 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
Check out crle (appeared in Solaris 8).
> but you can set $LD_LIBRARY_PATH in the user environment to have all
> working perfectly.
LD_LIBRARY_PATH is a horrible crock. You either must write a wrapper
for every application, or set it globally for all applications, which
can lead to failures. It is also doesn't work with setuid or setgid
binaries. It's nice when there is no other way, though.
> There is no real reason to have a so-linking path builtin in
> executables.
Sure there is!
> Linux has ld.so.conf
Only available to root, and it has system wide effect.
> and this is a good reason to avoid rpath,-R, LD_LIBRARY_PATH,
> LD_RUN_PATH and any other trick of this kind.
Keep up this thinking, and Linux will be a single user system where
the users have to know the root password to do useful stuff.
Again note: This is not relevant for official Debian packages, they
have the power to set up paths as they wish. (Aside: It would be
mighty nice if debs supported installation in a user's home directory,
but that would be a lot of work, and we'd need (among lots of things)
an ELF editor to change RPATH during installation.)
Kjetil T.
Reply to: