On Wednesday 21 March 2007 01:23 pm, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> This was one of the other suggestions made on the ARC discuss list. My
> primary concern about keeping both 2.0.x and 2.2.4 around (albeit
> temporarily) is that it creates the possibility of a huge disaster:
>
> application <X> links againsr /uar/apache2
> application <Y> links against /usr/apache2.2
> application <Z> links against <X> and <Y>

What about a scenario like this:

/usr/apache2.0.x
/usr/apache2.2.x
/usr/apache2 -> apache2.0.x

/usr/apache2.0.x - compiled with respective /usr/apache2.0.x runpath(s)
/usr/apache2.2.x - compiled with respective /usr/apache2.2.x runpath(s)

Simply put, the binaries would be compiled with the physical runpath, opposed 
to the symlink.

The user could easily change the apache2 symlink if it bothers them, and that 
would point to the new version, but would allow your entire stack to use the 
runpath you compiler for.

The user has what they have today, /usr/apache2 which points to the respective 
path which represents the version installed today.

Your code could and will use the new /usr/apache2.2.x runpath, so that it 
resolves properly.

The user still has the option of manually changing the symlink to point to the 
newer version, and would save themself having to modify their build 
environment, if that's worth something to them.

> If this were ever to happen, it would be discovered quite quickly (i'm
> willing to bet that any apache module linked in such a dysfunctional
> fashion will crash very quickly).

Doctor, my programs crash when I compile with /usr/apache2.0.x and 
/usr/apache2.2.x, what do you reccomend to fix that?:-/

The user could still use the new code by compiling with runpath to the hard 
path, without changing much at all.

Maybe I'm missing something, it seems to make sense to me.

-- 

Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group
Advocate of insourcing at Sun - hire people that care about our company!


_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Reply via email to