Hi, On 15 August 2012 12:27, Mark Morgan Lloyd <markmll.fpc-pas...@telemetry.co.uk> wrote: > Quite a long way from ideal, since it implies that an administrator has to > be involved even if the program is only sitting in an unprivileged user's > home directory (or is a symlink in ~ good enough?).
Correct, definitely not ideal. I was just thinking about the $HOME directory. I'll try and play with that now, and see what happens to my apps. Maybe my apps should all have startup scripts that define local LD_LIBRARY_PATH options? > I'm tempted to say that this is a distro issue, and that if an upstream > project (FireBird, OpenSSL, PostgreSQL) normally publishes an unversioned > library that a distro is at fault if it "decorates" it with an appended > version number without providing a symlink chain. They explicitly mention that general runtime libraries should not include the unversioned symlink. Only the -devel packages should include those. That makes me think, why do we then need the unversioned symlink in the first place! Fedora: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Guidelines#Devel_Packages OpenSUSE: http://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Shared_library_packaging_policy#Unversioned_packages Ubuntu/Debian: ?? I can't remember the URL now. -- Regards, - Graeme - _______________________________________________ fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit http://fpgui.sourceforge.net _______________________________________________ fpc-pascal maillist - fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal
