Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 555902 - cmake-utils.eclass: please disable rpath for non-prefix builds
Summary: cmake-utils.eclass: please disable rpath for non-prefix builds
Status: RESOLVED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Eclasses (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal
Assignee: Gentoo KDE team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: PATCH
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2015-07-25 23:30 UTC by Andrew Savchenko
Modified: 2015-11-18 09:48 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---


Attachments
cmake-utils.eclass-rpath.patch (cmake-utils.eclass-rpath.patch,463 bytes, patch)
2015-07-25 23:30 UTC, Andrew Savchenko
Details | Diff

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev 2015-07-25 23:30:06 UTC
Created attachment 407628 [details, diff]
cmake-utils.eclass-rpath.patch

Hello,

cmake allows to disable RPATH linking (enabled by default), this leads to insecure rpath warning during install phase checks, logs show that build directory (-Wl,--rpath /var/tmp/portage/...) is added to linker options.

Many ebuilds fix this by adding one of the following or similar options:
-DCMAKE_SKIP_RPATH=ON
-DENABLE_RPATH=OFF
-DCMAKE_BUILD_WITH_INSTALL_RPATH=OFF

I propose to add this functionality to the eclass, thus ebuilds can be simplified. See attached patch.
Comment 1 Johannes Huber (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2015-07-26 08:48:49 UTC
It looks good to me but i would prefer if you send the patch to -dev ml to get a wider review.
Comment 2 Andrew Savchenko gentoo-dev 2015-07-26 09:49:28 UTC
Done (mail is sent to dev ml).
Comment 3 Michael Palimaka (kensington) gentoo-dev 2015-08-07 18:08:51 UTC
I responded on the mailing list why I disagree with the patch.
Comment 4 Michael Palimaka (kensington) gentoo-dev 2015-11-18 09:48:46 UTC
(In reply to Michael Palimaka (kensington) from comment #3)
> I responded on the mailing list why I disagree with the patch.

For the record, my response was as follows:

This is usually a workaround for an underlying bug. Plus, this will
break any package that legitimately uses rpath.

As there were no further responses/discussion, I don't think we can proceed.