[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: binary distribution for shared libraries?

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: binary distribution for shared libraries?
Date: Fri, 20 May 2005 09:47:38 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.4.1i

Hi Ed,

* Ed Hartnett wrote on Fri, May 13, 2005 at 04:23:42PM CEST:
> I'm converting the open source netcdf scientific data package to
> libtool, and I have a question.


> We had been in the habit of releasing binaries with each release for
> each of the 6 or 7 systems we support (Linux, AIX, Sun, Irix, Mac OSX,
> Cygwin, etc.)
> Is it possible/advisable to release shared libraries as binaries?

Possible: with hacks only.
Advisable: no.

> Won't the built-in directory names cause a problem? In other words, if
> I build the shared library to be installed in /usr/local/lib, and the
> user downloads it and puts it somewhere else, that would cause the
> library to not load, correct?


> Any comments on distributing shared libraries in binary would be most
> appreciated. Most of our users have downloaded the binaries rather
> than building from source, and we would like to be able to continue
> doing that, if possible.

You /could/:
- configure without arguments (i.e. prefix implicitly /usr/local)
- make
- make install DESTDIR=`pwd`/$PACKAGE-$VERSION-bin
and then tar up everything in there.

Sure seems quite ugly from my point of view.  Libraries will be non
relocatable. If you depend on any other libraries, things are likely to
get much more complicated.

You are most likely much better off creating a RPM and a DEB and such
(I know Debian ships netcdf -- you might be able to just integrate their
config) for a couple of interesting distributions, or alternatively
distribute the corresponding spec files for easy rebuild.  Same goes for
other Unices.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]