From owner-cvs-all Thu Apr 29 7:49:52 1999 Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from frolic.no-support.loc (ppp39-64.hrz.uni-bielefeld.de [129.70.39.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5DDEA14C4E; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 07:49:35 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bfischer@Techfak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE) Received: from broccoli.no-support.loc (broccoli.no-support.loc [192.168.43.99]) by frolic.no-support.loc (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA00337; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 16:22:27 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from bjoern@no-support.loc) From: Bjoern Fischer Received: (from bjoern@localhost) by broccoli.no-support.loc (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA00387; Thu, 29 Apr 1999 16:22:26 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from bjoern@no-support.loc) Date: Thu, 29 Apr 1999 16:22:26 +0200 To: John Polstra Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/libexec/rtld-elf rtld.c [RELENG_3] Message-ID: <19990429162225.A267@broccoli.no-support.loc> References: <199904280123.SAA04295@freefall.freebsd.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Mutt 0.95.4i In-Reply-To: <199904280123.SAA04295@freefall.freebsd.org>; from John Polstra on Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 06:23:55PM -0700 Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk On Tue, Apr 27, 1999 at 06:23:55PM -0700, John Polstra wrote: > jdp 1999/04/27 18:23:55 PDT >=20 > Modified files: (Branch: RELENG_3) > libexec/rtld-elf rtld.c=20 > Log: > MFC 1.20 -> 1.21: Give RPATH precedence over LD_LIBRARY_PATH, as per > the ELF spec. I don't know if this was already discussed on current@... Do we have to follow the ELF specification by detail? At work I'm administering Solaris, IRIX and DigitalUnix machines. IRIX and DEC both behave as described in the ELF spec. -- and we ran into several problems: Often when a software package with shared libraries got a major update we used LD_LIBRARY_PATH temporarily so that old binaries found the proper libs. This was a long way to go due to that weird RPATH/LD_LIBRARY_PATH behavior. All in all, what is LD_LIBRARY_PATH for? It's for hacking and testing, for quick'n'dirty solutions. For linking binaries that may be installed on a system and will be used for a longer time you use RPATH. So I think giving RPATH precedence over LD_LIBRARY_PATH is a bad idea, although it conforms with ELF. Otherwise one may think LD_LIBRARY_PATH is a proper solution to get one's executables working. Bj=F6rn Fischer --=20 -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- GCS d--(+) s++: a- C+++(-) UB++++OSI++++$ P+++(-) L+++(--) !E W- N+ o>+ K- !w !O !M !V PS++ PE- PGP++ t+++ !5 X++ tv- b+++ D++ G e+ h-- y+=20 ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message