From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Feb 4 04:17:45 1999 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id EAA05915 for freebsd-hackers-outgoing; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 04:17:45 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au (rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au [129.78.129.109]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id EAA05910 for ; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 04:17:42 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from dawes@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au) Received: (from dawes@localhost) by rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au (8.9.1a/8.9.1) id XAA12719 for hackers@FreeBSD.ORG; Thu, 4 Feb 1999 23:17:38 +1100 (EST) Message-ID: <19990204231738.T28430@rf900.physics.usyd.edu.au> Date: Thu, 4 Feb 1999 23:17:38 +1100 From: David Dawes To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ldconfig and libraries References: <199901311851.KAA07228@vashon.polstra.com> <199902040322.TAA18413@vashon.polstra.com> <36B99FD3.41C67EA6@ics.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i In-Reply-To: <36B99FD3.41C67EA6@ics.com>; from Kaleb S. KEITHLEY on Thu, Feb 04, 1999 at 08:25:40AM -0500 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Thu, Feb 04, 1999 at 08:25:40AM -0500, Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: >John Polstra wrote: >> >> In article <36B700D2.41C67EA6@ics.com>, >> Kaleb S. KEITHLEY wrote: >> > >> > ldconfig for ELF should just go away. >> >> Feel free to remove it from your system. > >Wrong solution to the problem. > >> It's not going to go away in >> FreeBSD any time soon. You witnessed the outcry when I tried to argue >> against it months ago. > >Non sequitur. ldconfig is redundant at best, presents a minor security >risk, and the last time I tried it allowed for demonstrably incorrect or >unexpected behavior. > >System admins who think they know better be damned -- they're not >supporting the products they're breaking. If someone calls up and tells >me they installed my product somewhere other than where the install was >supposed to put it, tried to kludge it with ldconfig, and now the >product doesn't work correctly, the first thing I'm going to tell them >is to reinstall it in the correct, supported, location and let the >program's RPATH and ld.so do what they're supposed to do. Having experienced both sides of this, what I think would be good would be to be able to edit the RPATH in executables. That would allow the sysadmin to override it selectively. I don't know if that is feasible or not. David To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message