David Dawes wrote:
I don't have any objections to doing this on Linux. As I said, we
already do it on a range of other platforms and I'm not sure why
Linux is something of an exception in this regard. Does anyone
have a good reason to not do this?
In NX we use alternate versions of libX11, libXext and libXrender.
This is done in a way that doesn't interfere with the existing X
client environment, by setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH and, sometimes,
LD_PRELOAD, before running the involved application. Probably the
same applies to other systems built on top of X11. The use of
-rpath is not going to compromise this possibility and I would
consider this OK. Anyway, as a rule of thumb, I would prefer a
system where the only libraries that are used are those listed in
ld.so.conf. A specific application could still override the system
settings. Such application might wish to do so in order to
coexist with an alternate setup (think at two different versions
of KDE or GNOME installed on the same computer). Having applications
defaulting to a hardcoded library path could be a nightmare. I
would really prefer to deal with a program failing with an unre-
solved symbol instead of one dumping its core in the background
for no apparent reason.
/Gian Filippo.
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/devel
