Re: Feature request: setting env vars for binary wrappers

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On Fri, 2008-04-18 at 02:32 +0300, Roumen Petrov wrote:
> Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> > [SNIP]
> >> But if user run directly an application installed in non-default 
> >> location the user is responsible to set environment.
> > 
> > I'm not talking about application installed in non-default location.
> > I'm talking about uninstalled application.
> 
> There is no significant difference !

I thought there is.  The former is not supported, while I'm under the
impression that the latter is.

> >> If its a regression/unit test the correct application environment has
> >> to 
> >> be set in Makefile{|.in|.am} and the program/library will inherit it.
> > 
> > No, it's not a test suite.  It's a real, legitimate application the user
> > has built.  Now he wants to run it before doing "make install".
> 
> And if application don't read environment, next request is libtool 
> wrapper script to pass arguments to application command line.

The argument passing is part of the patch too.  But one or the other is
enough, because the application developer can use whatever is available
to them.  Currently, there is no way to fix this problem with autotools.
With the proposed changes, there will be.  That's all.

> The whole idea is libtool overkill.

Fair enough.  Just suggest an alternative please, instead of acting as
if the problem does not exist.

> Roumen
-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
 Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
        -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759