On Sat, Jul 15, 2006 at 07:50:42AM -0400, Charles Fry wrote: > 2) It would be nice to have some further discussion on Steve's comment > regarding the relative merit of using rpath and /usr/lib/<package> > versus moving all shared libraries into /usr/lib.
Uh, that was *not* the recommendation that you were citing from policy, nor was it the one I was suggesting should be overturned. I was responding to the suggestion that rpath was inappropriate, but adding your own directory to /etc/ld.so.conf would be ok. It would not be ok; there *is* no compelling reason for a package to add its own subdirectories to /etc/ld.so.conf. If the libraries are for public consumption, they should be installed to /usr/lib like all the others and share the simple, flat namespace cleanly; if they are not for public consumption, they should be kept in their own subdirectory and a mechanism such as rpath, LD_LIBRARY_PATH in a wrapper script, or dlopen()ing used instead. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
