Date: Sun, 19 Mar 1995 21:23:38 -0800 From: Steven Wallace <swallace@newport.ece.uci.edu> To: nate@sneezy.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: Paul Traina <pst@shockwave.com>, CVS-commiters@freefall.cdrom.com, cvs-gnu@freefall.cdrom.com, freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/ld shlib.c Message-ID: <9503200523.AA07989@newport.ece.uci.edu> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sun, 19 Mar 1995 18:36:42 MST." <199503200136.SAA04263@trout.sri.MT.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Why were /usr/local/lib and /usr/X11/lib removed from the standard search path? Tell me WHY a program should not rely on on a "non-standard" path for brining in libraries. You say it is "non-standard", but most BSD machines use /usr/local and /usr/X11R6. What is the matter with defining this as the default search path, and then if a user wants to use /opt then they can change that if they want to? This means programs written for any previous FreeBSD version will not be able to recompile without modification. Most of the ports will now have to be updated to reflect this change. Are you willing to make all the necessary fixes to make ports work with your change? Come to think of it, this causes a big ports dillema because now a port that relies on an installed library will have to assume it is installed in a specific directory and use an explicit -L/?. Unfortunately, a user may have it installed in a different directory which will make the port fail. This is avoided by having the standard search path. Steven
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?9503200523.AA07989>