Jeff Johnson wrote:
>
> On Jun 8, 2007, at 9:35 AM, Andy Green wrote:
>
>> Jeff Johnson wrote:
>>
>>> 2) absolute argv[0] path will be used if present to find
>>> configuration. relative argv[0] path will be
>>> made absolute using PATH lookup.
>>
>> That sounds like a very good idea, cf compilers finding libraries.
>>
I had forgotten this until I read the email, but the other reason I went
with environment variables and a shell wrapper for my relocation code
was to be able to pass in LD_LIBRARY_PATH so that the correct set of the
librpm libraries would be loaded. I see two ways around this, either
you need to statically link the librpm libraries into whatever the users
accesses, or dlopen them. (Or continue to use a shell wrapper and
pickup the LD_LIBRARY_PATH.)
--Mark
> Nod. I ook to gcc for ideas and prior art always. E.g. rpm macros,
> particularly the primitive
> test syntax like %{?...}, are ideas that were used from gcc option
> passing to
> back-end helpers long ago. The implementation has nothing to do with gcc,
> blame me, not gcc for that.
>
> Meanwhile, one important difference is that not only a rpm executable,
> but also rpmlib bindings, need configuration "discovery". That may mean
> I have to map sonames -> paths (using ldconfig -p) for finding $RPMHOME.
>
> That is likely be more controversial than finding executable in PATH and
> using a relative path from that location.
>
> 73 de Jeff
> ______________________________________________________________________
> RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
> Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
______________________________________________________________________
RPM Package Manager http://rpm5.org
Developer Communication List rpm-devel@rpm5.org
