Oliver Braun wrote:
Hi Stephan,
please find my comments inline:
Stephan Bergmann wrote:
[..]
- Executables and shared libraries in OOo-wo-URE find shared libraries
in URE they depend on via an RPATH (recorded in those executables and
shared libraries) that includes the link to the URE.
I don't understand what you need the symbolic link for:
exported interfaces usually reside at a fixed location (be it below /usr
for bundled or /opt for unbundled packages).
The symbolic link neatly takes care of those situations where "usually"
does not fit. (Also, it is what Sun's Linker and Libraries Guide
recommends under "Dependencies Between Unbundled Products.")
For manual overrides (e.g. for debugging), use LD_LIBARRAY_PATH, which
was invented for that purpose (I consider it a bug that we still use it
in our start script).
I am not talking about one-shot manual overrides. I am talking about
scenarios where I want to have two separate installations of
OOo-wo-URE/URE pairs available over a period of time (e.g., one for
developing cross-cutting feature A and the other for developing another
cross-cutting feature B in parallel).
[...]
- The deployment variables URE_BIN_DIR (used in all other places in
the code where things in URE need to be accessed) and URE_BOOTSTRAP
(pointing at a fundamentalrc in OOo-wo-URE that contains essential
deployment variables to adapt the URE to the needs of OOo) are set in
the shell scripts soffice and unopkg (which should cover, via
indirections, most if not all of the executables that constitute the
"interface of OOo," see
<http://www.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?list=dev&msgNo=19840>).
If the runtime linker was able to find libuno_sal.so, we already know
URE_BIN_DIR, don't we ? Why do we have to double that information in the
shell scripts ?
Right now, URE_BIN_DIR is convenient for not breaking the normal OOo:
desktop/source/deployment/registry/component/dp_component.cxx:1.16.10.2
calls the uno executable via "$URE_BIN_DIR/uno". If it used
"$ORIGIN/../ure-link/bin/uno" instead, we would need to introduce a
directory and symbolic link ure-link/bin -> ../program into the normal
OOo. But, yes, this decision should be re-evaluated before normal OOo
is finally replaced by OOo-wo-URE.
Please give some examples what entries will be in URE_BOOTSTRAP and why
they can't be in let's say "sofficerc".
Please search for "fundamentalrc" and "URE_MORE_TYPES" in
<http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/ODF_Toolkit/Efforts/OOo_without_URE>.
-Stephan
[...]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
