> There is no principle that says that things have to be hard for
> users.
Yup. Or you can feel free to answer all questions regarding that topic ;)
> Messing with system files like /etc/ld.so.conf is not something
> you want to do automatically in the build process;
Also Debian has as a rule (and probably LSB will suggest it),
that one package MUST NOT touch files belonging to another package.
(That is a distribution update nightmare.)
(It is mostly thought for inetd.conf, modules.conf and that, but I think
ld.so.conf belongs there too.)
> but adding rpath at
> link time in our own libraries is obviously part of the build process
Yes.
> Now you can argue that we shouldn't add rpath at all and let the user
> worry about fixing ld.so.conf; but I'm not sure I see what this would
> gain us. As long as the rpath feature is here, we might as well use it
> and save users trouble; unless there is some drawback to it that I
> missed.
It might not be portable to other platforms. But Solaris at least has
-R, dunno about *BSD and UnixWare.
Ciao, Marcus
