From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-bugs-return-344745-listarch-gcc-bugs=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 21439 invoked by alias); 25 Jan 2011 16:55:53 -0000
Received: (qmail 21388 invoked by uid 22791); 25 Jan 2011 16:55:52 -0000
X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0	tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_BG
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1)    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:55:48 +0000
From: "joseph at codesourcery dot com" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org>
To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: [Bug libfortran/46607] [4.6 Regression] libgfortran relocated install fails
X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC
X-Bugzilla-Type: changed
X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None
X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc
X-Bugzilla-Component: libfortran
X-Bugzilla-Keywords:
X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal
X-Bugzilla-Who: joseph at codesourcery dot com
X-Bugzilla-Status: NEW
X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3
X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: 4.6.0
X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields:
Message-ID: <bug-46607-4-BFiE3EOsHl@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
In-Reply-To: <bug-46607-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
References: <bug-46607-4@http.gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/>
X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/
Auto-Submitted: auto-generated
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 25 Jan 2011 17:01:00 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <gcc-bugs.gcc.gnu.org>
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-bugs/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org
X-SW-Source: 2011-01/txt/msg02684.txt.bz2

http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46607

--- Comment #8 from joseph at codesourcery dot com <joseph at codesourcery dot com> 2011-01-25 16:55:18 UTC ---
On Tue, 25 Jan 2011, rwild at gcc dot gnu.org wrote:

> But there is a good reason to relink on ELF: uninstalled libraries and
> executables get DT_RPATH entries against uninstalled libraries they depend on,
> so that uninstalled programs can be executed in a test suite before installing
> the libraries they depend on.  Removing (or replacing) those DT_RPATH entries
> is the point of relinking.  That GCC takes care of the uninstalled paths in
> some other way as well is something libtool cannot know.

Of course it can know - it just needs an appropriate way for GCC to inform 
libtool that the GCC testsuites take care of library paths.