From: | Bruce Momjian <maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | winter(at)jurai(dot)net (Matthew N(dot) Dodd) |
Cc: | lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu, Bill(dot)Allie(at)mug(dot)org, hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] dynamic libraries |
Date: | 1998-10-12 16:01:50 |
Message-ID: | 199810121601.MAA12241@candle.pha.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
> Anyhow, in summary, depending on enviornment variables or a hacked linkrer
> that supports 'ld.so.conf' is a bad thing on a real ELF system. ELF
> provides for compiled in search paths and they should be used. This
> reduces the additional steps a user must take to have a running system and
> does not violate the POLA. Since the compile/build process knows where
> the install destination will be, nothing prevents it from doing the right
> thing and using '-R' or '-rpath' ld(1) directives to set the search path.
Just to comment. If we use -R or -rpath, people need to use that for
_every_ application that uses libpq, etc. That seems like a pain to me.
B1ecause people have not had problems in the past using ld.so.conf, and I
can see them having problems with -R or -rpath, I would hesistate to
change it, though I can see why some installations would prefer the
-R/-rpath.
--
Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
maillist(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-12 16:06:46 | Re: [HACKERS] postmaster locking issues. |
Previous Message | Bruce Momjian | 1998-10-12 15:57:13 | Re: [HACKERS] Open 6.4 items |