[FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] library.mak: add rpath to shared libraries

[Ganesh Ajjanagadde]

On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 7:18 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at mit.edu> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanag at mit.edu> wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 2:22 AM, Hendrik Leppkes <h.leppkes at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 3:09 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>>> <gajjanagadde at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Fixes Ticket4673
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanagadde at gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  library.mak | 2 +-
>>>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/library.mak b/library.mak
>>>> index 29460b8..401da7c 100644
>>>> --- a/library.mak
>>>> +++ b/library.mak
>>>> @@ -58,7 +58,7 @@ $(SUBDIR)$(SLIBNAME): $(SUBDIR)$(SLIBNAME_WITH_MAJOR)
>>>>
>>>>  $(SUBDIR)$(SLIBNAME_WITH_MAJOR): $(OBJS) $(SLIBOBJS) $(SUBDIR)lib$(NAME).ver
>>>>         $(SLIB_CREATE_DEF_CMD)
>>>> -       $$(LD) $(SHFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) $$(LD_O) $$(filter %.o,$$^) $(FFEXTRALIBS)
>>>> +       $$(LD) $(SHFLAGS) $(LDFLAGS) $(LDEXEFLAGS) $$(LD_O) $$(filter %.o,$$^) $(FFEXTRALIBS)
>>>>         $(SLIB_EXTRA_CMD)
>>>
>>> LDEXEFLAGS is clearly not the appropriate way to go about this. These
>>> flags are for executables, not for shared libraries.
>>>
>>> - Hendrik
>>
>> Ok, so is it fine if this gets added to LDFLAGS instead? Or should a
>> separate e.g LDLIBFLAGS be used?
>
> Attached is new patch that creates a LDLIBFLAGS.

Ping.

>
>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ffmpeg-devel mailing list
>>> ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org
>>> http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel