Re: build.sh vs. LD_RUN_PATH

[Eric Haszlakiewicz <erh%nimenees.com@localhost>]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 11:05:34AM -0400, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 11:20:00AM +0200, Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> >
> > I've had some fun finding out why build.sh failed in src/lib/libz when  
> > crossbuilding from Linux. The failure was because the tools lint picked 
> > up the NetBSD libz.so in the obj dir instead of the system libz.so. This 
> > in turn was because I had set LD_RUN_PATH to something that included "." 
> > when the tools lint was linked. Which leads me to the question:
> 
> Honestly, putting "." into LD_RUN_PATH strikes me as deserve-to-lose
> behavior that we shouldn't change anything to "support".  Do you run with
> "." in root's path, too?

If it wasn't so easy to accidentally do that, I'd agree, but since "::"
is considered to mean ".", I have a bit of sympathy with the cause of
trying to do something to avoid problems.

eric