On 07/11/2014 12:09 PM, Zoltán Tóth wrote:
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Brian Anderson <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
# Impact
Installing rustc to non-default locations will result in an
installation that puts some important libraries in a location the
dynamic linker won't find, will need to be compensated for with
LD_LIBRARY_PATH.
This is too sad.
Some Rust users may not be administrators, but even if they are,
installing to some light custom folder is too convenient to miss it.
LD_LIBRARY_PATH is not known about by many, and even if known, editing
it is messy practice.
What about these alternatives?
1) Link dependencies of rustc statically to it?
We could link rustc statically. Right now it's not to reduce binary size.
2) On Windows the folder of the executable is always searched for
dependencies. Is this the case on Linux too? Then you could just let
'make install' copy everything next to rustc.
I may have misunderstood something basic.
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
_______________________________________________
Rust-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
