Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> writes:
> Robert Haas <robertmhaas@gmail.com> writes:
>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
>>> I don't think so. �It would just be another headache for packagers ---
>>> in Red Hat distros, at least, packages are explicitly forbidden from
>>> containing any rpath settings.
>> So what do they do about Perl and Python?
> Patch the source to not add rpath switches.
No, I take that back. What the RH packages do is configure with
--disable-rpath, and so long as that applies to this too, I'd
have no objection.
What I was mis-remembering is that there's a patch that *puts back*
plperl's rpath for libperl, because for some reason that no one has ever
satisfactorily explained to me, perl has an exemption from the distro
policy that loadable libraries must be installed so that they're known
to ldconfig. Which of course is exactly why rpath isn't (supposed to
be) needed.
regards, tom lane
