[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: RPATH status
- From: Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora leemhuis info>
- To: Development discussions related to Fedora Core <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
- Subject: Re: RPATH status
- Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2007 17:06:53 +0100
Hans de Goede schrieb:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 09.03.2007 14:43, Ralf Ertzinger wrote:
>>> On Fri, 9 Mar 2007 14:04:27 +0100, Miroslav Lichvar wrote:
>>>> On a x86_64 full installation there are 470 binaries with /usr/lib64
>>>> in RPATH. That looks like a lot of work to have this fixed and
>>>> maintained. Maybe a chrpath script could be used in the build process,
>>>> and remove automatically the obvious cases like /usr/lib64,
>>>> /usr/local/lib and @RPATH@ ?
>>> The right way would be to file bugs against the packages, I think.
>> The right way IMHO would be to enable the rpath checks on the buildsys,
>> so the build fails if rpath show up that are not whitelisted in the spec
>> file. Then way people notice the rpath and in most cases fix them; new
>> rpath further get noticed immediately, and we all save time as we don#t
>> have to file bugs :-) .
>> The checks are *iirc* enabled for the Extras builders. We should make
>> sure they get enabled for the new Fedora builders, too.
> rpmlint catches this, I'm sitll in favor of running rpmlint after a build,
> check the output against a whitelist of allowed output and if there is any
> output not in the whitelist, fail the build. We would need to integrate the
> same use of rpmlint in make <arch> from makefile.common then (or maybe first).
Sounds fine, too.
Cu
thl
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]