[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: DESTDIR install on hppa-hpux
From: |
Ralf Wildenhues |
Subject: |
Re: DESTDIR install on hppa-hpux |
Date: |
Thu, 4 Jun 2009 23:45:44 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) |
* Michael Haubenwallner wrote on Thu, Jun 04, 2009 at 01:35:11PM CEST:
> On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 20:54 +0200, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
>
> > > The most important part of the fix is already suggested in comments
> > > around 'hardcode_minus_L=yes', as the encoded library path is used as
> > > fallback location for a specific library when runpath lookup fails.
> > > As this isn't really 'hardcoding' in libtool's sense, hardcode_minus_L
> > > can safely be set to 'no' IMO, opening the door for DESTDIR support.
> >
> > Hmm. This does open a small security issue, no? Imagine the following
> > setup: user joe compiles some package, then uses 'sudo make install' to
> > install it in a system location. First issue: the path to the
> > compilation location is revealed in the installed libraries and programs
> > which have dependencies to newly-installed libraries. Second, if those
> > deplibs are removed for whatever reason, then the runtime linker will
> > search in joe's build tree for the shared libraries. This may not be
> > likely to happen, but it's something to think about.
>
> I've thought about this too, but how would the link command have to look
> like to avoid this issue?
I don't know. That's precisely the reason we haven't gone this way
before.
> > > Another minor one was that there is no need to pass
> > > "+b $install_libdir", as the linker ignores subsequent "+b" values.
> >
> > Erm, libtool has code to merge multiple run path values (and to let
> > ltmain know that this needs to be done). Weren't semantics on HP-UX
> > that way that, if +b was not used, then the linked path with -L is
> > searched too? That would be bad then.
>
> This is done anyway using $hardcode_libdir_flag_spec.
> Leaving "+b $install_libdir" in $archive_cmds would ignore the
> subsequent collected "+b $libdir".
Oh. So I guess this would be an independent fix anyway?
> > > arch HP-UX bits * compiler
> > > ------------------------------
>
> > What does this table mean? That for each of the combinations, the
> > libtool testsuite was run,
>
> Exactly.
>
> > and there were no failures?
>
> Well, there weren't _no_ failures, but the same failures compared to
> vanilla git/master, except for the 12 tests changing from SKIP or XFAIL
> to PASS (see above).
Cool. Thank you.
Cheers,
Ralf