> Am 04.12.2019 um 17:49 schrieb J. Lewis Muir <[email protected]>: > > On 12/04, Jens Rehsack wrote: >>> Am 04.12.2019 um 06:30 schrieb J. Lewis Muir <[email protected]>: >>> Your rationale for using /etc/ld.so.conf makes sense to me. >>> >>> However, at >>> >>> http://xahlee.info/UnixResource_dir/_/ldpath.html >>> >>> David Barr says: >>> >>> Half-hearted attempts to improve things >>> >>> Some OS's (For example, Linux) have a configurable loader. You can >>> configure what run-time paths to look in by modifying /etc/ld.so.conf. >>> This is almost as bad as LD_LIBRARY_PATH! Install scripts should never >>> modify this file! This file should contain only the standard library >>> locations as shipped with the OS. >>> >>> Unfortunately, he does not explain *why* he thinks modifying >>> /etc/ld.so.conf is almost as bad as LD_LIBRARY_PATH. >> >> Because it rules for all executables on your system. That can be dangerous. > > Thank you for all of your comments, including this one! > > I thought of another scenario: you don't have root on a machine, and > you want to install software in your home directory. Obviously, > /etc/ld.so.conf won't work for this case.
I'm pretty sure, there will be a nice metasploit to help out :) But yes, using a suitable rpath is much faster and less intrusive :D Best regards -- Jens Rehsack - [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
