Subject: Re: patch to allow /etc/ld.so.conf configure directories for ELF
To: Chris G. Demetriou <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Todd Vierling <email@example.com>
Date: 03/11/1999 18:14:22
On Thu, 11 Mar 1999, I can teach you how to fish... wrote:
: ...and isn't ld.so.conf useful during a standard compile?
Not if you use RPATH as part of a `standard' compile, which is what the ELF
ABI tells you to do.
On 11 Mar 1999, Chris G. Demetriou wrote:
: If this road is going to be chosen, it probably makes sense to rip all
: uses/support for the RPATH linker information out of our ELF bits.
: (i.e. don't use it when building X11 or package binaries, and rip
: support for it out of ld.elf_so.)
Whoa. Extremism-sarcasm mode off. ;)
: In other words, I don't particularly care which you choose (and/or
: NetBSD chooses), as long as it's not _both_. It doesn't make sense to
: use both. I happened to choose RPATH when i came to this choice
: originally, because that's what most ELF systems do.
Look at the a.out linker sources for a little while and see what -R does.
We have had RPATH support on our a.out ports since shortly after 1.2 -- and
I don't see any problems with having both, now that pkgsrc supports RPATH
everywhere. In fact, my a.out systems haven't had a ld.so.conf file, despite
their posession of xsrc and pkgsrc created binaries, in almost six
Yah, *I* like rpath. Not everyone does, or cares to learn about it, and
ld.so.conf doesn't *need* to do anything, if it does not exist.
-- Todd Vierling (Personal firstname.lastname@example.org; Bus. email@example.com)