Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 19:18 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > > Antoine Martin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Bearing in mind that I have not been confronted to any of these issues, > > > I can't think of a reason why a piece of software should rely on > > > hard-coded paths. > > > > By hard-coded do you mean to exclude software that sets paths at > > compile time, or do you mean run time? > For shared libraries, both, I thought that ld.so.conf & friends were > supposed to take care of things like that.
They do, which makes it unimportant at run-time what the library directories are called. So we should all switch to SuSE 9.2 and use only binary packages. :) > Now, the default directories for program specific libs and data > (ie: /usr/lib/myprogram/*) obviously need to remain a compile time > option. > Or am I missing something here? My problem was with plug-ins and so it was a compile time option like what you say. Maybe we could use a database for looking up the locations of things, given a key, and then you could install program components anywhere. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.chemoelectric.org "I have directed that in the future I sign each letter." -- Rumsfeld
pgpthpWUP0UNl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
