[rcml-devel] [Rcml-group2] Eliminated need for LD_LIBRARY_PATH (fwd)

[John B. <jx...@ga...>]

  Some of you people on group I might be interested in reading this,
too.

Forwarded message:
> From rcm...@li... Thu Nov  9 00:01:34 2000
> From: John Blackstone <jx...@ga...>
> Message-Id: <200...@ga...>
> To: rcm...@li...
> Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2000 00:00:34 -0600 (CST)
> Cc: jx...@ga... (J. David Blackstone)
> X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> Subject: [Rcml-group2] Eliminated need for LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> Sender: rcm...@li...
> Errors-To: rcm...@li...
> X-BeenThere: rcm...@li...
> X-Mailman-Version: 2.0beta5
> Precedence: bulk
> Reply-To: rcm...@li...
> List-Id:  <rcml-group2.lists.sourceforge.net>
> Content-Length: 992
> 
>   I've set up the Makefile so that after compiling it is no longer
> necessary to set the LD_LIBRARY_PATH variable.  Isn't that good news?
> 
>   LD_LIBRARY_PATH is an example of a UNIX feature that exists for a
> good reason but is often used for bad reasons.  Having to set it
> before running a program is a bad idea.  What if you had to set it
> before running commands like cat or ls?  Nevertheless, the correct way
> to handle the issues that are incorrectly solved with LD_LIBRARY_PATH
> is hardly ever understood, and so many UNIX software packages require
> you to set it.
> 
>   I had to deal with this issue some time last fall, and knew the
> answer was somewhere on the Internet.  Fortunately, I finally found it
> again.  I thought you might appreciate having this information to look
> at.  It is at:
> 
> http://www.visi.com/~barr/ldpath.html
> _______________________________________________
> Rcml-group2 mailing list
> Rcm...@li...
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/rcml-group2
>