chicken-hackers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Chicken-hackers] Build problems


From: felix winkelmann
Subject: Re: [Chicken-hackers] Build problems
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2007 08:54:55 +0100

On 1/29/07, Brandon J. Van Every <address@hidden> wrote:
Tony Sidaway wrote:
> My other Ubuntu system behaves in the same way.  I think you've both
> worked out why this was happening--the CMake configuration doesn't
> provide a hard-coded path in the target files so the user must
> configure the system instead to ensure that the default path contains
> the required libraries.

It seems there's plenty of RPATH functionality available in CMake.  You
just have to specify it, it's not automatic.  Googling around, it seems
there's some religion about whether RPATHs should be allowed; various OS
distros ban them.  If RPATH is indeed deemed politically correct, then
according to
http://public.kitware.com/pipermail/cmake/2006-July/010272.html all we
have to do is:

"Just set INSTALL_RPATH on the module target to be the rpath needed in
the install tree. Then things will just work."

I'm feeling a little hazy about RPATH religion so I welcome others'
comments on it.  I'm still not really a Linuxer.  I have a nominally
working Cell BE simulator on Fedora Core 6 now, but it was very boring
to get to that point, and I'm sort of burned out about it.


I don't know much about "RPATH religion", but if it makes a different between
a working build and a non-working one, we should prefer the working
solution (i.e. use INSTALL_RPATH).

(Why isn't /usr/local/lib in the default linker path? And why do some systems
not put /usr/local/bin into the PATH? Why make using the system harder
than it needs to be? Oh, well...)


cheers,
felix




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]