This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Installation proposal


On Feb 27, 2002, Daniel Jacobowitz <drow@mvista.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 27, 2002 at 10:44:52PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> > 3. We would test that our installations are really location-independent,
>> >    which they supposedly are.
>> 
>> Not really.  At least not cross toolchains that use a shared glibc as
>> the C library, because glibc's libc.so is a linker script that
>> references full pathnames into the install tree.  Yet another problem
>> about which we must make a conscious decision.

> Which works perfectly well if you remove the full paths and let the
> linker search this.

I wonder why glibc doesn't just do that, then...  I mean, this is a
bug in glibc, no?

> We're in the middle of fighting a losing war with libtool.  Right now,
> we edit installed .la libraries to remove the full path information
> from them.  I might add that, on GNU/Linux, this is entirely adequate;
> it would be much simpler if we could get libtool not to generate such
> things.  Ditto for DT_RPATH.

Patches to get libtool to take -L or -R flags out of link commands and
.la files would be definitely welcome.  It's been in my to-do list
forever.

-- 
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


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]