[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Multiple -rpaths

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: Multiple -rpaths
Date: Mon, 3 Nov 2008 09:14:31 +0100
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)

* Jan Engelhardt wrote on Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 07:39:56AM CET:
> On Sunday 2008-11-02 21:56, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> >* Jan Engelhardt wrote on Sun, Nov 02, 2008 at 05:24:27PM CET:
> >> 
> >> I have two libraries in paths that are not searched by default (e.g. 
> >> /opt/foo/lib). So I have this in my pkgconfig files:
> >> 
> >> foo.pc: Libs:      -L${libdir} -lfoo
> >> bar.pc: Libs:      -L${libdir} -lbar
> >> 
> >> The linker will find -lfoo,-lbar and successfully create the output file 
> >> -- which is an .la library --, but running `ldd` on it says 
> >> " => not found", and that seems fine to me, since no -rpath 
> >> was given. So I try to add -rpath in the pkgconfig files:
> >
> >Bzzt.  Libtool's way to list additional run paths is not -rpath, but -R.
> >Yes, incredibly smart, I know, but we can't change it now.  -rpath is to
> >say "the library I'm creating is to be installed later in this
> >directory".
> Well that ("is to be installed here") is not the intention, but
> something more like "make the runtime linker look here" -- at least
> that is what GNU ld(1) tells me about -rpath.

Sure.  GNU ld's "-rpath" === libtool's "-R".  So use "-R", please.

> >So use -R, with or without following space.  With multiple paths, use -R
> >path1 -R path2.  But even better if you don't use it at all; you should
> >never need it to link against libtool libraries (those where an .la file
> >is present).
> .la is actually not present. Just the .so.

Too bad.

> >If you need to specify a way that is both portable to libtool and a
> >GNU binutils ld-using compiler, then use -Wl,-rpath -Wl,$(libdir). 
> >Of course that breaks for some (few) non-GCC compilers (because they
> >don't understand -Wl), and many non-GNU linkers (because they use
> >something other than -rpath, or don't allow multiple instances of
> >-rpath but need one flag with colon-separated optarg, or so).
> Is not that what libtool is supposed to cover up? Maybe not for every
> make invocation à la `make LD=zzzld`, but perhaps determining the
> type of ld at configure-time.

But it *DOES* cover up.  Just use -R.  Reread my post, please, the last
paragraph speaks about a special case that you may or may not need to


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]