Thank you Tony and Enrico, this was something I was never able to get across.
Bruce
> On Jan 8, 2019, at 8:17 AM, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>
> Dear P.O.,
>
> On 08.01.2019 16:24, P.O. Jonsson wrote:
>> I am not taking about the future, it is working NOW, without any
>> modification besides
Hälsningar/Regards/Grüsse,
P.O. Jonsson
oor...@jonases.se
> Am 08.01.2019 um 17:17 schrieb Rony G. Flatscher :
>
> Dear P.O.,
>
> On 08.01.2019 16:24, P.O. Jonsson wrote:
>> I am not taking about the future, it is working NOW, without any
>> modification besides the /bin
>> being in the
Dear P.O.,
On 08.01.2019 16:24, P.O. Jonsson wrote:
> I am not taking about the future, it is working NOW, without any modification
> besides the /bin
> being in the path. NO NADA NIX modifications it works out of the box. Try it.
I believe you. :)
> A relocatable installation is desirable for
Dear Rony,
I am not taking about the future, it is working NOW, without any modification
besides the /bin being in the path. NO NADA NIX modifications it works out of
the box. Try it.
A relocatable installation is desirable for other reasons, such as for creating
an automated build to
Dear P.O.,
On 08.01.2019 16:16, P.O. Jonsson wrote:
> For MAC at least a build to a USB stick is relocatable to another computer
> since the name of the
> stick will be the name of the volume, automatically mounted to /Volumes
with RPATH defined the way Enrico suggests, there is no need to
Dear Enrico:
On 08.01.2019 16:11, Enrico Sorichetti via Oorexx-devel wrote:
> I wonder why everybody refuses to use the proper constructs for the RPATH
> Looks like I am wasting my time testing and making suggestions
please bear with us!
Not having *any* background knowledge of CMake and the
For MAC at least a build to a USB stick is relocatable to another computer
since the name of the stick will be the name of the volume, automatically
mounted to /Volumes
There is a USB standalone version for testing here
On 08.01.2019 15:52, Enrico Sorichetti via Oorexx-devel wrote:
> Right now You cannot relocate the installed thing
> Because the rpath is an absolute one
> I posted a few emails back the right constructs …
Hmm saw them, but was not sure what they were about and whether that was all
that was
I wonder why everybody refuses to use the proper constructs for the RPATH
Looks like I am wasting my time testing and making suggestions
E
> On 8 Jan 2019, at 16:08, P.O. Jonsson wrote:
>
> With this convention - would it be possible to make the executables
> relocatable?
Dear all,
I think there might be another way of solving this problem. If you symlink all
libraries in /lib back to /bin it will look as if the libraries are in the same
place as the executable ( in „." basically), so one could rely on that always
being the case.
During a time when my build
Right now You cannot relocate the installed thing
Because the rpath is an absolute one
I posted a few emails back the right constructs …
Here they are again
With these settings all works fine for me without bothering
To export DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH or LD_LIBRARY_PATH
# do not skip the full
yes, I think I read that it is possible to define multiple rpaths with
install_name_tool
> On 8 Jan 2019, at 10:46, Rony G. Flatscher wrote:
>
> Would it be possible to define RPATH such, that it always looks in the
> directories ".", "./lib",
> "../lib", "/usr/local/lib" (maybe even
Would it be possible to define RPATH such, that it always looks in the
directories ".", "./lib",
"../lib", "/usr/local/lib" (maybe even "/opt/local/lib") for the needed
libraries?
This way a USB-stick version may have the executables in the same directory or
lib in a companion or
subdirectory.
13 matches
Mail list logo