On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 17:30:50 -0500 Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> babbled:
> On Friday 29 December 2006 06:33, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > yes it will - it handles this too. check the code. :) or it at least tries. > > last i looked the code simply exported LD_LIBRARY_PATH=$bindir/../ ... so if > it's changed since, then sure, i'd agree that the current code handles it well the code in e_prefix.c is devoted to trying to figure this stuff out so that e can be moved about and figure out its prefix simply from base execution without requiring the system to be set up (this helps people install it as a user in ~/ when they don't have root access etc.). i'd like to keep this feature and not play with compile flags (as this percolates down to compile flags for everything e may need). i'm loathe to play with compile flags... when i can play with code instead :) either way - the code removes its magic ld lib path stuff except when executing its own utils (which will want it). :) > > sure - though there are exec wrappers in e's code that modules should use > > :) > > if that's true then modules calling exec functions are broken so i wont > belabor that point > -mike > -- ------------- Codito, ergo sum - "I code, therefore I am" -------------- The Rasterman (Carsten Haitzler) [EMAIL PROTECTED] 裸好多 Tokyo, Japan (東京 日本) ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list enlightenment-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
