This is the mail archive of the 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: forestalling GNU incompatibility - proposal for binary relative dynamic linking

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:53:11PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:38:49PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:16:36PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > cool.. any chance for some syntactic sugar so me (and other 
> > > users/vendors) wouldn't need to change any of their build scripts 
> > > and compilation processes?
> > 
> > Uh, like what?  That's about as simple as you can get.
> > 
> > 
> > r~
> I don't understand. 
> Which is simpler, changing an environmental variable, or adding extra 
> CFLAGS to every single compile and recompiling?
> In addition, in your --rpath example, the relative pathing is hardcoded
> into the executable, wheras with "*" you could modify the runtime behavior
> of the executable at runtime. I suppose you could change this with chrpath,
> but why bother? What if you want to test out two versions of relative
> libraries side by side? 

You might want to take a look at Richard's suggestion again.  The
string '$ORIGIN' gets hardcoded into the binary and handled by the
dynamic linker.

But really, RPATH is a good solution to almost no problems.

Daniel Jacobowitz

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