[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Relocatable installation
From: |
Jan Nieuwenhuizen |
Subject: |
Re: Relocatable installation |
Date: |
Mon, 31 Jan 2011 22:18:28 +0100 |
[cc: list]
Ludovic Courtès schreef op ma 31-01-2011 om 22:00 [+0100]:
Hi,
> Your patch lacks this RPATH magic, though.
Yes, we have that in our GUB cross build system. Possibly this
is a thing/feature request for libtool.
> Perhaps it should check
> whether ‘-Wl,-rpath='$ORIGIN/../lib'’ works?
That would be a nice feature. I expect that if you want to
use this, you should know what you're doing anyway...
> Is ‘-Wl,-z -Wl,origin’
> needed as well when linking ‘guile’?
No, we only use
-Wl,-rpath -Wl,'$'ORIGIN/../lib
We do that by postprocessing libtool, substituting the
hardcode_libdir_flag_spec, of course, something like:
([('^(hardcode_libdir_flag_spec)=".+"',
'hardcode_libdir_flag_spec="-Wl,-rpath -Wl,\\$libdir -Wl,-rpath
-Wl,\'$\'ORIGIN/../lib -Wl,-rpath
-Wl,/home/janneke/vc/gub/target/mingw/root/usr/lib"')],
'/home/janneke/vc/gub/target/mingw/build/guile-1.9.14/libtool')
> Yes, that’s what I meant: it only works as long as users touch only
> $prefix, not $libdir, $bindir, etc.
Sure. Dropping a binary package in a random place is a
common way to do exactly that.
> Then I have nothing against this option, as long as it’s off by default.
Great, thanks!
Jan.
--
Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden> | GNU LilyPond http://lilypond.org
Freelance IT http://JoyofSource.com | Avatar® http://AvatarAcademy.nl