Charles Fry wrote: > > A package I am creating from scratch is giving me the lintian warning > binary-or-shlib-defines-rpath. I've looked for this kind of answer before - it's not as simple as it appears. rpath arises from libraries in non-standard locations, either alone or when linked to a binary. 1. Dependencies can bring in rpath: See Bug # 374797 (amd64 specific) 2. linking binaries against pkglib_LTLIBRARY libs as opposed to lib_LTLIBRARY libs brings in rpath because the pkglib isn't in a standard library location. e.g. test programmes commonly need rpath which is OK as they aren't installed but this can catch you out if an installed binary is built in the same way. 3. Sometimes linda reports problems with rpath when lintian does not - this happens with one of my packages that has a GModule plugin. Packages available at: deb http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ packages/ deb-src http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/ packages/ cashutil, gpe-expenses and pilot-qof. (Any tips gratefully received!) For me, it usually involves repeatedly using grep against the configure scripts, Makefiles and object files trying to isolate the problem. > My search revealed two possible solutions: 'configure --disable-rpath' > where supported, or 'chrpath -d'. It seems that if removing unwanted > rpaths is really this simple, it could be stated within the lintian > info. --disable-rpath is not always supported and even when it is, it might not cover all circumstances (although that would be a bug upstream). > For that matter, it would even be nice for lintian to refer to some > external documentation on the matter, to avoid users having to > repeatedly filter through years of mailing list archives. I fear there isn't usually a one-size-fits-all answer for rpath problems. I may be wrong. > So, my questions are: Have I succesfully identified the currently > accepted ways of fixing this warning? Depends. Does it actually fix the warning? > Should I file a bug with lintian > to provide more information on this, possibly suggesting the use of > chrpath? chrpath doesn't look like it would solve my rpath problem. > Should I file a bug with developers-reference asking for a > section documenting this problem and its solutions? I'd certainly like to know just what others have done to solve rpath issues. -- Neil Williams ============= http://www.data-freedom.org/ http://www.nosoftwarepatents.com/ http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature