Hello, Marius Bakke <[email protected]> skribis:
> Mark H Weaver <[email protected]> writes: [...] >> I believe you're mistaken. Those commits eliminated one of the uses of >> 'patchelf' in meson-build-system, but there still remains a call to >> 'augment-rpath' which uses patchelf, and patchelf is still added as an >> implicit input. Yeah, the reason is that implementing ‘augment-rpath’ is obviously harder than implementing ‘shrink-rpath’ (the result might not fit.) > Since I'm here, I'd like to point out that there has been some activity > upstream recently around RPATH handling: > > https://github.com/mesonbuild/meson/commit/e3757e3d3cf24327c89dd3fc40f6cc933510f676 > > I believe this commit eliminates the need for "shrink-rpath", and > facilities are planned to also control the installed RUNPATH. I don’t fully understand what this commit does, but it seems to be a step in the right direction. The “XXX” found in the RUNPATH of Epiphany (<https://bugs.gnu.org/31970>) also seem to be there as a way to allow RUNPATH to be adjusted upon install, meaning that we wouldn’t have anything to do on our side. In the meantime, I wonder if we can remove the patchelf dependency selectively for packages where the patchelf phase isn’t necessary. Epiphany may well fall into that category. Thoughts? Ludo’.
