On Tue, 2009-06-30 at 20:35 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote: > Hello Michael, > > I'm pretty short on review time ATM; sorry for not providing a detailed > review.
No problem. It's just that the hpux10.20 box is shot down tomorrow, so I cannot test this platform any more. > > * Michael Haubenwallner wrote on Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 11:22:31AM CEST: > > > > Ok, here's the third way of supporting DESTDIR on hppa-hpux, now without > > the +cdp linker flag (#2), but using the absolute target libdir in the > > 'internal name' instead, to fix the security issue of #1. > > Using absolute paths seems like a step backward, with all the world > wanting relocatable packages more than anything. I don't think we > should go that way unless we cannot help it at all. But maybe I have > misunderstood you latest approach? Do you mean subsequent linked binaries should not contain the location the dependent shared library was originally targetted for? Well, I can agree here. Patch#2 with the +cdp mess would avoid that. But another try: It should work to *link* the shared libraries *with* the absolute internal name, so in-package executables get this as fallback path without the +cdp mess, and to *relink* the shared libraries *without* the absolute internal name, but using the +cdp linker flag once to drop the $inst_prefix_dir. Another question: HP-UX does support SHLIB_PATH for 32bit hppa, and both LD_LIBRARY_PATH and SHLIB_PATH for hppa64 and ia64 (32/64), which can be enabled easily. Is it preferred to use the runpath from an environment variable? Thanks! /haubi/
