On 11-04-2007 15:22:38 -0400, Armando Di Cianno wrote:
> > [tefnut:/var/tmp] % install_name_tool -change 
> > /Library/Gentoo/usr/lib/libssl.0.9.8.dylib /var/tmp/libssl.0.9.8.dylib test
> > [tefnut:/var/tmp] % cp /Library/Gentoo/usr/lib/libssl.0.9.8.dylib .
> > [tefnut:/var/tmp] % ./test
> > OpenSSL 0.9.8e 23 Feb 2007
> > [tefnut:/var/tmp] % otool -L test
> > test:
> >         /var/tmp/libssl.0.9.8.dylib (compatibility version 0.9.8, current 
> > version 0.9.8)
> >         /Library/Gentoo/usr/lib/libcrypto.0.9.8.dylib (compatibility 
> > version 0.9.8, current version 0.9.8)
>  <snip />
> 
>  We use this feature, on Darwin, at lot at my company.  It's important to 
>  note that most binaries, on Darwin, may need to be compiled with 
>  "-headerpad_max_install_names" -- which is actually now antiquated / 32-bit 
>  only -- or, better "-headerpad [value]".
> 
>  This option is needed for the cases where it's not /Y/Z -> /A/B but /Y/Z -> 
>  /A...A/B...B .
> 
>  The fun starts with -headerpad_max_install_names when some apps think you're 
>  monkeying too much with the linkage options, and start to make only static 
>  versions.

I'm actually not persuing to so stuff like you have.  Neither have I
ever seen such things in objects produced in prefix.  I guess that stuff
is heavily used in Applications, where they also use relative stuff.  Or
not?

-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

-- 
gentoo-alt@g.o mailing list