Hi Kevin, On Tue, Jun 02, 2009 at 02:18:25PM +0100, Kevin Cowtan wrote: > OK, that is pretty cool, looks like the correct technical solution for > our relocatable binaries.
Yes - Peter did some great analysis of all this on Linux and OsX. > I can see implementation problems. It looks to me as though this will > only work if you build in place. All the coot dependencies get built in > their own trees and the installed later. I suspect therefore that the > link step might not work, because the rpath will be wrong until the > binaries are shifted into place. Maybe that can be dealt with using > LD_LIBRARY_PATH while building (but I'm out of my depth here). Yes probably ... sounds sensible. > I also suspect the packagers will then be unhappy: > http://wiki.debian.org/RpathIssue Yes: for packaging something into a proper distro system I wouldn't go that way. But for a tar.gz file that just gets unpacked it is a solution. Cheers Clemens -- *************************************************************** * Clemens Vonrhein, Ph.D. vonrhein AT GlobalPhasing DOT com * * Global Phasing Ltd. * Sheraton House, Castle Park * Cambridge CB3 0AX, UK *-------------------------------------------------------------- * BUSTER Development Group (http://www.globalphasing.com) ***************************************************************
