[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: removal of .la files from Debian and a possible solution to the libt

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: removal of .la files from Debian and a possible solution to the libtool shared libs problem
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2009 06:31:29 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-09)

* Richard Purdie wrote on Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 12:37:54AM CEST:
> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 20:44 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> > With GNU/Linux, and libraries all being in directories searched by
> > default by both the link editor and the runtime linker, the problems
> > are fairly limited.  IIRC Debian requires that you link directly against
> > all libraries that you require directly.
> > 
> > The problems start as soon as you link (directly or indirectly) against
> > libraries in directories not searched by default.  IOW: typically
> > anything not provided by a properly packaged Debian package, installed
> > by the user or the system maintainer.
> Surely at least on Linux the -rpath linker option would be a much better
> way to solve this?

What do you mean with "much better"?  Libtool uses -rpath to solve this.
As Mike said, part of the issue is that libtool doesn't use -rpath-link.

> Linux does seem to have good dynamic linker support and its a shame
> libtool effectively drags it down to a lower common denominator of other
> platforms with worse support.

Actually, historically that was probably done on purpose, to remind
developers that they wouldn't have the same power available everywhere
(which can help avoid relying on nonportable features).  (I'm not
stating my own opinion here.)


reply via email to

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