From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYSo8-0002dm-8J
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:35:00 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYSo6-0002dN-N7
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:34:59 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GYSo6-0002dK-Gl
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:34:58 -0400
Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GYSwb-0006Fv-Uj
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 15:43:46 -0400
Message-ID: <452FE96F.1020800@gmx.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 21:30:55 +0200
From: Martin Bochnig <mb1x@gmx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] configure flag for compilation question..
References: <12993045.1160767103427.JavaMail.root@eastrmwml08.mgt.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <12993045.1160767103427.JavaMail.root@eastrmwml08.mgt.cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Ben Taylor wrote:

>---- Ishwar Rattan <ishwar@pali.cps.cmich.edu> wrote: 
>  
>
>>Trying to compile qemu on amd64 based Solaris.
>>
>>I do not have write permission to /usr/local subtree
>>
>>./configure --libdir=other-path --prefix=not-ustlocal
>>is fine
>>but make always generates binaries that want to find
>>/usr/local/lib/libSDL-1.2.so.0 etc. (checked with ldd).
>>
>>What is the way out for this sticky point?
>>    
>>
>
>Manually add "-L/usr/local/lib -R/usr/local/lib" 
>

Rather "-L/his/home/sdl_amd64/lib -R/his/home/sdl_amd64/lib"
Because I doubt, an amd64 version of libSDL is currently present in
/usr/local/lib/amd64
(and he doesn't have w access).

This method is btw not really "new" to me, see my posting from a few
hours ago:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=15448&tstart=0


>to the Makefile for the link
>phase so it will correctly add those paths to the library lookup.  If I had
>a code base to look at this instance, I could tell you where.  You could
>also add those flags to Makefile.target in the SOLARIS specific areas,
>which would probably make more sense.
>
>As Martin indicated, setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH may get you a running
>binary, but LD_LIBRARY_PATH is the wrong answer for Solaris.
>
>Ben
>  
>

> "LD_LIBRARY_PATH is the wrong answer for Solaris"
???
--->>  Weak statement.

It has its [dis]advantages.
Namely that the paths to a library are _not_ hardwired.
That's the exactly reason, why I did recommend it in this very scenario.
And I would do it again for Ishwar's current needs.

-M.