On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Peter Seebach wrote:

> In message <Pine.NEB.4.30.0201142041060.8263-100000@triton.invisible.ca>, "Jare
> d D. McNeill" writes:
> >On Mon, 14 Jan 2002, Peter Seebach wrote:
> >> Meanwhile, how many such library name clashes do we actually have?  Any?
> >
> >We have no say on what 3rd party developers name their libraries.
>
> True - but we can always still use -Wl,-R *if there is a problem*.  I think
> this is a case where the default should be "do what the user probably wants
> rather than fail".

Actually, with ELF, you can effect that easily. Just "export
LD_RUN_PATH=/usr/X11R6/lib" or perhaps
"LD_RUN_PATH=/usr/local/lib:/usr/pkg/lib:/usr/X11R6/lib" before
building. As long as you don't have any "-Wl,-R", "-Wl,-rpath" or
"-Wl,-rpath-link"  arguments at all, LD_RUN_PATH from the environment
will become the run path embedded in the binary. I believe that's the
main reason why many third party developers don't set "-Wl,-rpath" in
their build systems, even though the whole world, practically, is ELF.
The only reason we favor the "-Wl,-R" form in pkgsrc is that it
happens to also work with a.out.

Frederick