[lld] r247475 - Implement -rpath.

[Ed Maste via llvm-commits]

On 13 September 2015 at 19:49, Hal Finkel via llvm-commits
<llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Joerg Sonnenberger via llvm-commits" <llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org>
>> To: "llvm-commits" <llvm-commits at lists.llvm.org>
>> Sent: Sunday, September 13, 2015 4:25:26 PM
>> Subject: Re: [lld] r247475 - Implement -rpath.
>>
>> On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 02:56:44PM -0500, Hal Finkel wrote:
>> > Just to confirm, generating both DT_RPATH and DT_RUNPATH is a
>> > reasonable option for NetBSD and older FreeBSD systems?
>>
>> NetBSD completely ignores DT_RUNPATH. But providing both wouldn't be
>> an
>> option for systems that moved to the broken DT_RPATH behavior.
>
> What do you mean? On the systems that support both, DT_RPATH is ignored when DT_RUNPATH is present, right? Or is this not always true?

As far as I know this is the case. The default toolchain on FreeBSD
currently emits binaries with both, and DT_RPATH is indeed ignored
when DT_RUNPATH is present.

Joerg, are you aware of systems that "moved to" the silly (but
documented) DT_RPATH behaviour? My understanding is that a number of
systems implemented the silly behaviour from the beginning, and later
introduced DT_RUNPATH to fix that.