New FreeBSD package system (a.k.a. Daemon Package System (dps))

Kris Kennaway kris at obsecurity.org
Fri May 11 08:40:28 UTC 2007


On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:33:29AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
> Kris Kennaway <kris at obsecurity.org> writes:
> > On Fri, May 11, 2007 at 10:19:46AM +0200, Dag-Erling Sm??rgrav wrote:
> > > Not if you want to use pre-built packages.  You made sure of that when
> > > you decided (against my objections) to include .la files in packages.
> > I have a suspicion you're never going to let that go, but it's not
> > relevant here anyway.  Binaries have been hardcoding their build
> > location (e.g. /usr/local) since the dawn of time.
> 
> Most don't.

Assertion without proof.  In fact a quick survey shows that 90% of my
/usr/local/bin references /usr/local.

> >                                                     The best you can
> > do is to binary edit everything to a string of the same length, and
> > that works for .la files too.
> 
> The existence of .la files is a bug.
> 
> We already have a mechanism for recording dependencies between
> libraries; it's built into the ELF format, and does not require
> hardcoding any directories.  Introducing .la files which override the
> existing mechanism and *do* hardcode directories is a regression.
> 
> I don't buy the argument that "KDE won't build without them", or
> whatever it was you used to justify this.

I can't help it that you weren't paying attention.

Kris


More information about the freebsd-hackers mailing list