Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 22:28:21 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net> To: Archie Cobbs <archie@tribe.com> Cc: nate@rocky.sri.MT.net (Nate Williams), freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: ld default path Message-ID: <199511110528.WAA04034@rocky.sri.MT.net> In-Reply-To: <199511110138.RAA03175@bubba.tribe.com> References: <199511110054.RAA03579@rocky.sri.MT.net> <199511110138.RAA03175@bubba.tribe.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[ Putting /usr/local/lib into the linker's default search ] > But can't we add /usr/local/lib to the search path without having "ld" > crash just because the directory doesn't exist? I don't think it will crash if the directory doesn't exist. > It seems to fit in with the underlying model of FreeBSD, which is to > have and use a proper /usr/local hierarchy. Not necessarily. I don't have any libraries in /usr/local on most of my boxes. Following that arguement, should we stick /usr/X11R6/lib into the default search path since it contains lots of libraries as well? (My arguement is against both) > Or do you mean that some people might expect some library in /usr/local/lib > to *not* be found unless they explicitly specify -L/usr/local/lib ? Right. Nate
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199511110528.WAA04034>