On 12/20/2012 11:01 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote: > > >>> The libs fir libiconv and GNU gettext are in /usr/local/lib and not >>> anywhere to be found in the system lib areas : >> >> The disadvantages of RPATH are well-documented. > > Really? Name one please. Certainly not. It would be way off-topic, and it's controversial and inflammatory. Suffice it to say that the non-usage of RPATH is deliberate, and has been considered at length. >> Your problem is best solved by installing dependent libraries where >> ld.so can find them. > > Yes and no. Again I could argue the point from the perspective of > control and quality. If I rely upon the software from the OS > supplier ( Red Hat, Debian, Oracle ) then I must assume that the OS > vendor is on top of things and provides reasonably up to date > software that addresses security and feature concerns. Well, yes. But that has no bearing on making ld.so aware of where you've put your libraries. > This is rarely the case and the trade off between stability and > feature rich end user tools is always a tough balance. I therefore > choose to build what I want and isolate it from the OS vendor. Your call. >> ldconfig can do this, but if these libraries are available as >> standard packages that's hugely preferable. > > to whom ? Perhaps not to you. I'm not going to argue with you. gcc-help is not for such things. If you really want to build your gcc binaries with RPATH, you can do that. Andrew.
