From owner-freebsd-questions  Fri Nov 10 21:26:16 1995
Return-Path: owner-questions
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id VAA00898
          for questions-outgoing; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 21:26:16 -0800
Received: from rocky.sri.MT.net (rocky.sri.MT.net [204.182.243.10])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) with ESMTP id VAA00891
          for <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 21:26:05 -0800
Received: (from nate@localhost) by rocky.sri.MT.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) id WAA04034; Fri, 10 Nov 1995 22:28:21 -0700
Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 22:28:21 -0700
From: Nate Williams <nate@rocky.sri.MT.net>
Message-Id: <199511110528.WAA04034@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
In-Reply-To: <199511110138.RAA03175@bubba.tribe.com>
References: <199511110054.RAA03579@rocky.sri.MT.net>
	<199511110138.RAA03175@bubba.tribe.com>
Sender: owner-questions@freebsd.org
Precedence: bulk

[ 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