[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Packaging Update

[Dan Scott]

Great to hear from you, Ben!

On Sun, Jul 3, 2011 at 1:32 PM, Ben Webb <bjwebb67 at googlemail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> The issue with the build process that I'm currently trying to tackle
> is that of rpath. Distributions, fedora especially[5], frown upon the
> usage of rpath hardcoded library paths (to the point of build tools
> refusing to build packages). However, by default Evergreen and OpenSRF
> use these rather heavily for their own libraries. Is this a concious
> decision that has been made, or just something autotools defaults to?
> Whereabouts in the build process does this get decided? Currently for
> fedora I am manually replacing rpath with ld.so.conf.d after build,
> but it would be nicer to do it 'right' during the build process.

On this matter, I think it's primarily because that's a default of
autotools (see http://sourceware.org/autobook/autobook/autobook_88.html
for the autotools counter argument). If you have the time to teach
autotools not to add rpath in the first place, and can confirm that
the non-rpath'ed approach works, please go for it; packaging needs
should trump autotools conventions, methinks. There's always "chrpath
-d" if all else fails.