Bug#519941: 10.2 Libraries recommends use of /etc/ld.so.conf instead of /etc/ld.so.conf.d
* Steve Langasek <vorlon@debian.org> [2009-03-16 07:52]:
> This recommendation needs to be elminated entirely. It is *not* ok for
> packages that provide libraries to stick extra linker paths in the global
> configuration, whether by modifying ld.so.conf or by adding to
> /etc/ld.so.conf.d. Either the libraries provided by the packages are meant
> to be public, in which case they should be installed to the standard library
> path instead of needlessly adding another directory that's going to be
> globally visible anyway; or they should not, and the cooperating packages
> should use rpath instead.
>
> Use of rpath should still be discouraged, but if someone is bound and
> determined to violate the FHS with their library paths in order to have
> private libraries, they should make them really private with rpath instead
> of using this "compromise" solution that takes the worst of each approach.
Coincidentally, there has been a followup to Bug#510579 yesterday [1] where
it is asked to add a /etc/ld.so.conf.d/octave.conf file for making the
private libraries distributed with octave3.0 available publicly. It seems
that this would make the life of maintainers of shogun and octave-ruby much
easier.
What should I do now? Ask the maintainers of those packages to use rpath?
[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=510579#78
--
Rafael
Reply to: