7 Oct
2010
7 Oct
'10
6:21 a.m.
Hello,
I wonder if is not good ideea to set RPATH into Trinity binaries, to
${prefix}/lib. In this case Trinity will still working even LD_LIBRARY_PATH
is not set at all.
Pros? Cons?
--
Serghei
7 Oct
7 Oct
7:12 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] RPATH vs LD_LIBRARY_PATH
On Thursday 07 October 2010 16:21:32 Serghei Amelian wrote:
Hello,
I wonder if is not good ideea to set RPATH into Trinity binaries, to
${prefix}/lib. In this case Trinity will still working even LD_LIBRARY_PATH
is not set at all.
Pros? Cons?
Some docs about this subject:
http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue
http://www.vtk.org/Wiki/CMake_RPATH_handling
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rpath_(linking)
I discovered this problem when I tried to compile kdelibs, while arts libs are
located in /usr/kde/3.5/lib and mcopidl fail to run, because in my
environment LD_LIBRARY_PATH is not set by default. Of course, packagers can
setup LD_LIBRARY_PATH in his environment (RPATH will remain optional and it
can be disabled).
--
Serghei
10:10 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] RPATH vs LD_LIBRARY_PATH
Hello,
I wonder if is not good ideea to set RPATH into Trinity binaries, to
${prefix}/lib. In this case Trinity will still working even
LD_LIBRARY_PATH
is not set at all.
Pros? Cons?
Pros: Avoids library not found problems during compilation, *as long as
the libraries are never moved on the system.*
Cons: Causes all kinds of library not found problems for the user, as he
or she may not be aware that libraries cannot be moved. Developers would
have to rebuild every single package that uses Trinity libraries if a core
library changed location, which is impractical to nearly impossible.
Tim
5163
days inactive
5163
days old
2 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
Serghei Amelian -
Timothy Pearson