Re: forestalling GNU incompatibility - proposal for binary relative dynamic linking

[Daniel Jacobowitz]

On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:53:11PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:38:49PM -0800, Richard Henderson wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 24, 2005 at 03:16:36PM -0800, Edward Peschko wrote:
> > > cool.. any chance for some syntactic sugar so me (and other 
> > > users/vendors) wouldn't need to change any of their build scripts 
> > > and compilation processes?
> > 
> > Uh, like what?  That's about as simple as you can get.
> > 
> > 
> > r~
> 
> I don't understand. 
> 
> Which is simpler, changing an environmental variable, or adding extra 
> CFLAGS to every single compile and recompiling?
> 
> In addition, in your --rpath example, the relative pathing is hardcoded
> into the executable, wheras with "*" you could modify the runtime behavior
> of the executable at runtime. I suppose you could change this with chrpath,
> but why bother? What if you want to test out two versions of relative
> libraries side by side? 

You might want to take a look at Richard's suggestion again.  The
string '$ORIGIN' gets hardcoded into the binary and handled by the
dynamic linker.

But really, RPATH is a good solution to almost no problems.

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/