Bruce Momjian <maillist@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
>> On systems that support it, the -rpath options should
>> be used when building executables so that they know
>> where to find their libraries. See the Perl 5 build
>> scripts to find out how to do this on different machines.
> It makes it easier for users to put it in ld.so.conf.
I'm still planning to work on replacing our ad-hoc Makefile.shlib
support with GNU libtool. That should make most of these issues
go away --- libtool knows about -rpath, for example. In the meantime,
I'm not too excited about expending effort on improving Makefile.shlib
beyond where it is.
I'm not sure if I will get to this for 6.6 --- I have other to-do
items that I consider higher priority. If someone else is more
interested and wants to take on the project, be my guest...
>> 3. Either put a FAQ entry or determine which libc versions
>> give this message and provide alternate expected files.
Something I'd like to see is a ".similar" mechanism for regress test
expected files, like we have for template files. There only seem
to be two popular wordings of that atoi overflow message, so there
should be no need to keep more than two expected files for the int2
and int4 tests; all we need is a file that lists which platforms
to use each one for. I think that'd be much easier to maintain than
the current approach is.
regards, tom lane
