Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH and --rpath ***please read***
>>>> "Hrvoje" == Hrvoje Niksic
<hniksic(a)iskon.hr> writes:
Hrvoje> nbecker(a)fred.net writes:
> I don't know if anyone noticed my previous post on this
subject.
Hrvoje> I noticed it, and I disagree with it.
> As I recall, it was removed because it can cause severe
problems.
> If an rpath is compiled in to an executable, that is later run in a
> different environment, the referenced rpath could contain references
> to NFS mounted stuff that is no longer valid, causing severe startup
> delays.
Hrvoje> I would expect XEmacs to notice the location of libraries and use it.
Hrvoje> If I move the libraries and XEmacs malfunctions because of that, I
Hrvoje> can't really blame it. Hardcoding library paths in the binary is IMO
Hrvoje> much better than the alternative, which is building an XEmacs that
Hrvoje> doesn't work.
I understand that if someone moves the libraries we could feel
somewhat justified in saying that he gets what he deserves (I'm not
necessarily saying that I agree with this point of view). But the
same problem can occur if you build the binary in one environment and
then install it into another.
And if --rpath cannot be overridden by LD_LIBRARY_PATH, things are
even worse. A bad --rpath written into the executable may cause very
long hangs without a good way to fix it, and maybe even no
diagnostics.