From owner-freebsd-current Sat Aug 15 20:40:42 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id UAA25046 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 15 Aug 1998 20:40:42 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from sasami.jurai.net (sasami.jurai.net [207.153.65.3]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id UAA25040 for ; Sat, 15 Aug 1998 20:40:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from winter@jurai.net) Received: from localhost (winter@localhost) by sasami.jurai.net (8.8.8/8.8.7) with SMTP id XAA06950; Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:40:07 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1998 23:40:06 -0400 (EDT) From: "Matthew N. Dodd" To: Jim Bloom cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ELF problems to occur In-Reply-To: <35D6500F.7F1149BA@acm.org> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Sat, 15 Aug 1998, Jim Bloom wrote: > '-R' is nice when you have source. If you are software vendor > distributing binaries only, your example show why LD_LIBRARY_PATH is > nice. The system administrator can configure the loading to match the > local environment without requiring supporting libraries to be > installed in one precise place. The exact same problem arises when one > buys a binary only package. So we only care about LD_LIBRARY_PATH when the following conditions exist: 1. We wish to install and run a package for which we do not have the source. 2. We wish to install the package in a location other than the default. Given these conditions, I do not think it unrealistic for us to attempt to do everything in our power to limit the need for LD_LIBARARY_PATH for normal system operation. This means the base system and ports. The alternative is to watch -questions become deluged with "I can't find my libraries but they are listed in /etc/ld.so.conf. Help!!" (Obviously, this won't happen unless 3.0 is still partially an a.out system when it releases.) > I agree that editting a binaries search list is one of the better > solutions, but I don't believe it is feasible on Solaris. It should be feasible on FreeBSD given the premise that "everything is possiable in software." The question now is if it is practical for someone to spend the time to add support. -- | Matthew N. Dodd |This space | '78 Datsun 280Z | FreeBSD/NetBSD/Sprite/VMS | | winter@jurai.net |is for rent| '84 Volvo 245DL | ix86,sparc,m68k,pmax,vax | | http://www.jurai.net/~winter | Are you k-rad elite enough for my webpage? | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message