Hello Wintaki,
* Wintaki Hagabashi wrote on Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 09:59:29PM CEST:
> * Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > * Wintaki Hagabashi wrote on Tue, Oct 23, 2007 at 08:21:57PM CEST:
> > > How can we disable libtools use of rpath?
[...]
> > The use of run paths ensures that the installed programs can be
> > executed. I understand that they are not relocatable that way.
> > I also understand that, since you are using Linux and Solaris only,
> > there are better possibilities wrt. relocatability on these two systems.
> > But they are not portable to other systems.
>
> I understand this and think it makes perfect sense in some situations.
> If I am building a new server and installing package X, it works
> perfect. But what if you are releasing binaries? Say you are Oracle
> for a minute, and you build you code into
> /development/build/release-1. Now you package and ship to thousands
> of people who will install your software in any number of places.
> Isn't LD_LIBRARY_PATH the thing to do here? I'm not sure how else you
> could handle this?
Well, the gnulib module approach can help you do without having your
users set LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Which is good. Otherwise, pick one of the
other two possibilities I wrote.
> See, in this particular case the customer does not have a compiler,
> linker, or make tools. They want a tar file with binaries that they
> untar and run. While not disagreeing with you about LD_LIBRARY_PATH,
> most every commercial package I have used required modifying
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
Or used wrapper scripts.
> > For portable relocatable packages you can look into the gnulib
> > modules named relocatable-{lib,prog} and some more.
> Do you know where I could learn more about these?
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/>, more specifically:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/MODULES.html#module=relocatable-lib>
The Gnulib manual is helpful in getting things to work:
<http://www.gnu.org/software/gnulib/manual/>
> Yes, I would agree, but when the customer calls me up and then says
> "well why the hell are you looking in /development/build anyway?" I'm
> not sure what my response is. True, it is technically a customer
> issue but in this case, it took them some time to figure it out. Even
> ldd would hang trying to mount /development.
I agree, and aside, this issue isn't so rare.
[...]
> Thanks, I did see that but wanted to avoid hacking libtool if I could.
Well, then try the first approach:
./configure --prefix=/usr # or just: --libdir=/usr/lib
make
make DESTDIR=/where/you/want/the/binaries install
I assume you will need to take measures to find your other files anyway,
when releasing binaries.
Cheers,
Ralf
_______________________________________________
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
