This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Problematic linking between glibc and shared libgcc
- To: jbuck at synopsys dot COM
- Subject: Re: Problematic linking between glibc and shared libgcc
- From: Mark Mitchell <mark at codesourcery dot com>
- Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:41:55 -0800
- Cc: rra at stanford dot edu, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
- Organization: CodeSourcery, LLC
- References: <20010220102242R.mitchell@codesourcery.com><200102201908.LAA07856@toledo.synopsys.com>
>>>>> "Joe" == Joe Buck <jbuck@synopsys.COM> writes:
>> It's been a long-standing GCC policy not to use -rpath (or
>> equivalent) when linking with any shared library so that people
>> can move the libraries around later.
>>
>> The argument for -rpath are that it makes things easier for
>> users if you *don't* move stuff; the argument it against is
>> that it makes things harder if you do.
Joe> What if there were a simple flag (which would not be the
Joe> default) saying to wire in the paths to the gcc-supplied
Joe> libraries? (Use of this flag would be an error on platforms
Joe> that don't support the rpath concept). Documentation for the
Joe> flag would warn that binaries produced this way won't run on
Joe> machines that don't put the libraries in the exact same
Joe> places.
I certainly have no objection.
--
Mark Mitchell mark@codesourcery.com
CodeSourcery, LLC http://www.codesourcery.com