From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYWEY-0007kE-KM
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:14:30 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1GYWEU-0007bY-D5
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:14:29 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GYWEU-0007bB-4M
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:14:26 -0400
Received: from [213.165.64.20] (helo=mail.gmx.net)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GYWN1-0003bU-TZ
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 13 Oct 2006 19:23:16 -0400
Message-ID: <45301CDF.1030106@gmx.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2006 01:10:23 +0200
From: Martin Bochnig <mb1x@gmx.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] configure flag for compilation question..
References: <12457496.1160780613485.JavaMail.root@eastrmwml08.mgt.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <12457496.1160780613485.JavaMail.root@eastrmwml08.mgt.cox.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
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:

>---- Martin Bochnig <mb1x@gmx.com> wrote: 
>  
>
>>Ben Taylor wrote:
>>
>>    
>>
>>>As Martin indicated, setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH may get you a running
>>>binary, but LD_LIBRARY_PATH is the wrong answer for Solaris.
>>>
>>> 
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>My answer had been a bit longer:
>>
>>"Read ld.so.1(1)
>>i.e.
>># man ld.so.1
>>
>>Then: *One* option is to set $LD_LIBRARY_PATH (or potentially
>>$LD_LIBRARY_PATH_64 [not required])."
>>    
>>
>
>I'm not saying it doesn't work.  But properly compiled programs for
>Solaris include the run time paths to the libraries so an LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>environment variable is not required.
>
>LD_LIBRARY_PATH is interesting to test out new versions of support
>libraries without actually having to recompile, so it has it's uses.
>but too often, folks use LD_LIBRARY_PATH as a panacea on Solaris
>to fix poorly compiled programs.
>
>Ben
>  
>


He is experimenting and trying out a bit.
Not building to be published packages.

I advised him to read and understand ld.so.1(1).
And I mentioned $LD_LIBRARY_PATH as *one* possible option for him to get
quick results.