On Thursday, April 4, 2019 11:28:36 AM CEST Ingvar Hagelund wrote: > > On Thursday, March 28, 2019 11:58:21 AM CET Ingvar Hagelund wrote: > > > Fedora prohibits the use of rpath (...) > > to., 28.03.2019 kl. 13.27 +0100, skrev Pavel Raiskup: > > With new enough libtool script, you can use this instead: > > > > %configure LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH=%_libdir > > > > or if that makes sense in your case: > > > > %configure LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH=%_libdir: > > Great, thanks. This seems to work well. Should I just get rid of the old > sed edit of libtool then? Yes. > make check works fine with just adding the variable to configure, and I > no longer get warnings about rpath from mock/rpmbuild. Or should I keep > the the sed hack, while changing it to use "LT_SYS_LIBRARY_PATH" instead > of "DIE_RPATH_DIE" You are obviously using a new enough libtool script, so you can avoid using the DIE_RPATH_DIE sed. > > This is unfortunately needed because it is not easy to detect whether > > the linker uses /usr/lib64 path by default. Ideas? Libtool attempts > > to parse ld.so.conf & friends, but the desired info isn't there.... > > Make rpm put %_libdir in something like /etc/ld.so.conf.d/libtool.conf > , is that too intrusive? Probably, I guess (that is a question for ld.so maintainers). Pavel > > > I have gotten around this by putting in LD_LIBRARY_PATH where I > > > need, but rpmlint gives me a warning on that. > > > > Can you post the warnings? I've been using LD_LIBRARY_PATH in %check > > for quite some time [1], and rpmlint did not complain... > > Ah, this is fixed now in fedora. Great! > > Ingvar > > > > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
