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

Re: RPATH status

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).



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