| 1 |
Hello, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Thu, Dec 06, 2001 at 09:43:16PM +0200, Dan Armak wrote: |
| 4 |
> In Gentoo LD_LIBRARY_PATH is called simply LDPATH. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
I don't think so. LD_LIBRARY_PATH ist relevant for the shared library loader |
| 7 |
ld.so (see also "man ld.so"). LDPATH is (as far as i know) not relevant for |
| 8 |
ld.so. LDPATH and LD_LIBRARY_PATH are IMHO totally different things (and |
| 9 |
IMHO should LD_LIBRARY_PATH not be set to a default value). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> Legend has it drobbins simply renamed it because he was tired of typing |
| 12 |
> the longer version :-) |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Is it some kind of "urban legend"? ;-) |
| 15 |
I also did a "strings /lib/ld.so | grep LD" to see, if ld.so was modified |
| 16 |
to accept LDPATH instead of "LD_LIBRARY_PATH" and i saw no "LDPATH" in, |
| 17 |
so the meaning of LD_LIBRARY_PATH seems not to be modified and LDPATH seems |
| 18 |
not to "replace" LD_LIBRARY_PATH ... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
> Under /etc/env.d you will see a lot of files setting that variable. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
... which is not the same as LD_LIBRARY_PATH ... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> However, it doesn't actually get exported to your shell. Instead, env-update |
| 25 |
> changes /etc/ld.so.conf to include those dirs. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
IMHO is that "the right thing" to do. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> So if you app is well written just let it think LD_LIBRARY_PATH is empty and |
| 30 |
> that everything is ni standard dirs - it is. Is that approach problematic? |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
No. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
ciao, |
| 35 |
Juergen Ilse (ilse@××××××.de) |
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Wenn ich auch nur aus jedem 1000. Bug in einem M$ Produkt|Juergen Ilse |
| 38 |
einen Tag trauern wollte, also da muesste ich 300 Jahre |Internet POP Hannover |
| 39 |
alt werden und wuerde mehrere Dutzend schwarze Anzuege |Vahrenwalder Str. 205 |
| 40 |
aufbrauchen. (Detlef Bosau in dcoulm) |30165 Hannover |
Archives