[Python-Dev] Please give this patch for building bsddb a try
Barry A. Warsaw
Mon, 24 Jun 2002 16:24:27 -0400
>>>>> "MvL" == Martin v Loewis <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
>> Do people still use NFS servers to share programs? I thought
>> big cheap disks and RPMs did away with all that. :)
MvL> This was on Solaris, so no RPMs.
I know, I was kind of joking. But even Solaris has pkg, though I
don't know if it's in nearly as widespread use as Linux packages.
>> I believe that -R/-rpath adds directories to runtime search
>> paths so if the NFS directory was unmounted, ld.so should still
>> be able to locate the shared library through fallback means.
>> That may fail too, but oh well.
MvL> Yes, but the startup time for the program increases
MvL> dramatically - it has to wait for the dead NFS server to
Yeah that would suck. I wonder if that would only affect imports of
bsddb though since the Python executable itself wouldn't be linked
>> One issue on Solaris may be that -- according to the GNU ld
>> docs -- the runtime search path will be built from the -L
>> options which we're already passing, /unless/ -rpath is given,
>> and this seems to be added
MvL> Where do the docs say that? I don't think this is the case,
MvL> or ever was ...
It's in the GNU ld info page under Options:
The `-rpath' option may also be used on SunOS. By default, on
SunOS, the linker will form a runtime search patch out of all the
`-L' options it is given. If a `-rpath' option is used, the
runtime search path will be formed exclusively using the `-rpath'
options, ignoring the `-L' options. This can be useful when using
gcc, which adds many `-L' options which may be on NFS mounted
Reading it again now, it's not clear if "SunOS" also means "Solaris".
>> We've made it so easy to build a batteries-included Python that
>> I think it would be unfortunately not to do better just because
>> we fear that things /might/ go wrong in some strange
MvL> That is a reasonable argument, and I've been giving similar
MvL> arguments in other cases, too, so I guess I should just stop
>> Here's a compromise. If LD_RUN_PATH is set at all (regardless
>> of value), don't add -R/--rpath. Or add a --without-rpath
>> switch to configure.
MvL> I guess we don't need to compromise, and approach is *very*
MvL> cryptic, so I'd rather avoid it.
Cool. I'll commit the change.
MvL> It looks like the current bsddb module is going to go away,
MvL> anyway, so there is no need to tweak the current
MvL> configuration that much. I don't know what the bsddb3 build
MvL> procedure is, but any approach you come up with now probably
MvL> needs to be redone after pybsddb3 integration.
I suspect we'll need /something/ like this once pybsddb's integrated,
but I'll definitely be testing it once Greg does the integration. I
doubt pybsddb's build process is going to just drop into place, and I
suspect it'll actually be easier.