This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Installation proposal
On Feb 27, 2002, Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 10:28:38PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> A sane system, to me, is one in which programs and libraries can find
>> their dependencies without the user having to resort to setting
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH and *hoping* it will work, if they are installed in
>> the location they were configured for.
> IMO, there is *no* acceptible use of DT_RPATH, and the *only*
> acceptible use of DT_RUNPATH must include the $ORIGIN token
> available on recent Solaris and Linux. Otherwise it becomes
> impossible to move installations after the fact.
You choose not to listen to me. I've told you already, more than
once: it does not become impossible to move installations. It becomes
impossible to move the installation, then replace it with some other
installation, that contain shared libraries with the same SONAMEs,
then expect the moved installation to still work. Think libc5
lossage. If you do that, you lose. If you just move installation,
LD_LIBRARY_PATH will do just fine, except for the caveats I mentioned
on certain insane dynamic linkers.
>> - on HPUX...
> "HPUX" and "sane" have never been uttered in the same sentence
> without accompanying negatives.
:-)
>> ... there are some dynamic linkers in which LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>> (or the equivalent) won't do what you want.
> Which is "broken" not "sane".
Ok, so if HP-UX is insane and Solaris is insane :-), are we just not
going to support shared libraries on them?
--
Alexandre Oliva Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist Professional serial bug killer