On Thu, 15 Nov 2012, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> This is an RFC patchset to separate GTK GUI codes to a shared object,
> called libperf-gtk.so and use it with libdl. It's in an early-stage
> so probably has some rough edges, but I'd like to get some comments.
>
> For now, the libperf-gtk.so (I'm open to a better name suggestion)
> contains whole libperf.a and libtraceevent.a for simplicity. And
> because of that, every single object in perf tools needs to be built
> as a PIC like libtraceevent does.
>
> As a result, library dependency of the perf itself reduced like this:
[snip]
> To run GTK report browser, you can do it with usual --gtk option but
> you might need to setup LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
>
> $ LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$PWD ./perf report --gtk
>
> Missing LD_LIBRARY_PATH will lead to a fallback TUI or stdio (for
> NO_NEWT=1 build) report browser.
What's the benefit of doing this? Requiring users to specify
LD_LIBRARY_PATH seems like a major PITA.
Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
