[Qbs] RUNPATH problem in Ubuntu 20.04

[Карелин Павел]

Christian, hello.

Are there any plans to solve the problem of RUNPATH?
Or will everything remain as it is?

--
Pavel


26.10.2022 16:29, Карелин Павел пишет:
> > Do I understand correctly that you use self-built QtC and you built 
> it using Qbs?
> Yes. Moreover, Qbs is also self-built :))
>
> > My understanding is that RUNPATH only affects libraries with a 
> NEEDED entry, i.e. direct dependencies, while RPATH covers indirect 
> dependencies as well.
> Here says about the same: 
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/47117443/dynamic-linking-with-rpath-not-working-under-ubuntu-17-10/47243544#47243544
>
> > What I don't understand is why Pavel's linker uses RUNPATH and mine 
> uses RPATH by default. Could it be that distributions patch binutils 
> according to their preferences?
> This problem began to arise in people when switching to Ubuntu 18.04 
> (I ran into it at Ubuntu 20.04 because I missed 18.04)
> Apparently in Canonical decided that RUNPATH by default is more right.
>
> --
> Pavel
>
>
> 26.10.2022 14:38, Christian Kandeler via Qbs пишет:
>> On 10/26/22 13:24, Иван Комиссаров wrote:
>>> I think, both RPATH and RUNPATH should work.
>>
>> My understanding is that RUNPATH only affects libraries with a NEEDED 
>> entry, i.e. direct dependencies, while RPATH covers indirect 
>> dependencies as well. What I don't understand is why Pavel's linker 
>> uses RUNPATH and mine uses RPATH by default. Could it be that 
>> distributions patch binutils according to their preferences?
>>
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qbs mailing list
>> Qbs at qt-project.org
>> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/qbs
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Qbs mailing list
> Qbs at qt-project.org
> https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/qbs

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.qt-project.org/pipermail/qbs/attachments/20221124/3f6a9e68/attachment.htm>