Re: LD_LIBRARY_PATH versus rpath

On tor, 2010-05-06 at 09:38 -0400, Tom Lane wrote:
> Funny point here: in the Fedora/RHEL RPMs, I use --disable-rpath
> because "don't use RPATH" is part of the standard packaging guidelines
> for that platform.  However, pl/perl has to double back and use rpath
> anyway because libperl.so doesn't exist in the ldconfig path; it's in
> some version-numbered directory and they don't provide any link or
> ldconfig entry so you could find it otherwise.  Annoying as heck.
> I've always wondered how many other packagers have to carry patches
> similar to
> http://cvs.fedoraproject.org/viewvc/rpms/postgresql/devel/postgresql-perl-rpath.patch

Debian has libperl in /usr/lib, so there is no issue.  But if there
were, there is a relatively new policy that you can should use rpath if
you need a library that is installed in a nonstandard path.  (Should
actually use this new runpath thing, perhaps.)  The same new policy
prohibits packages from modifying /etc/ld.so.conf.