On Fri, Jan 29, 1999 at 07:11:54AM -0200, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > On Jan 27, 1999, Jules Bean <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Therefore, we chose to solve that particular problem (the libc5-6 > > transition) by moving libraries around, knowing that our linker was up to > > the job. > > It is now clear that it is not. :-(
It IS, as long as you don't use rpath. We don't use rpath for vendor-supplied parts of the system. The user is obviously free to use them for locally compiled stuff, and AFAIK it will behave as advertised. Yes, when Debian moves those libraries in the future, those programs will break. The user shouldn't really use rpath. But there are plenty of other ways for a user to hose their system; we really can't stop them doing it. > If it worked well you wouldn't be complaining about a problem that is > caused by its incomplete behavior, but that could be avoided by > modifying other pieces of software that are doing their jobs > correctly. Modifying libtool to remove -rpath fixes the problem at our end. The documentation for our package checker (lintian) includes two ways to do this easily. Hamish -- Hamish Moffatt VK3TYD [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Latest Debian packages at ftp://ftp.rising.com.au/pub/hamish. PGP#EFA6B9D5 CCs of replies from mailing lists are welcome. http://hamish.home.ml.org
