On Wed, 2008-03-12 at 14:28 +0100, Mary Ellen Foster wrote:
On 10/03/2008, Tom spot Callaway <tcallawa(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-10 at 16:14 +0100, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
> > On Monday, 10 March 2008 at 15:24, Rex Dieter wrote:
> > > > On the other hand, maybe I should be allowed to
> > > > include an rpath in this situation because I really always want to
> > > > linked to that particular libperl.so
> > >
> > > This is a case where rpath usage is acceptable, imo.
> > I wonder why libperl is not a proper library then. I see that it has no
> > Are there any plans upstream to make it a proper library?
> Not that I'm aware of. IMHO, this is a valid rpath exception case.
Does this also hold for Java native packages that need libjava.so and
its friends (which are under /usr/lib/jvm/java/.../$arch/...) ?
Maybe. I'm not a java expert at all. Might be something to keep in mind
for the folks drafting the Java guidelines.