<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On 05.12.2015, at 16:13, Joe Groff <<a href="mailto:jgroff@apple.com" class="">jgroff@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="font-family: SourceCodePro-Regular;"><br class="">On Dec 4, 2015, at 8:49 PM, Daniel Dunbar <<a href="mailto:daniel_dunbar@apple.com" class="">daniel_dunbar@apple.com</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">On Dec 4, 2015, at 6:37 PM, Ugo Arangino <<a href="mailto:swift@ua94.de" class="">swift@ua94.de</a>> wrote:<br class=""><br class="">Why is the Dynamic linker DT_RPATH set, instead of configure it like this `/etc/ld.so.conf.d/swift.conf` or copying the libraries to a appropriate place?<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">For the initial release, we felt it was more important for things to work locally (and simply) for people downloading our snapshots than to support this and have more complicated installation instructions. <br class=""></blockquote></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Will this be a solution to install Swift easy and on an appropriate directory?</div> $ wget -O - <a href="https://swift.org/install-ubuntu14.04.sh" class="">https://swift.org/install-ubuntu14.04.sh</a> | bash<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="font-family: SourceCodePro-Regular;">We also suspected that people would quickly try things like building Docker images with Swift, and this problem doesn't show up for users who are building their projects that way.<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div>An other solution would be, to offer `.deb` packages for `libswiftCore.so` ...<div class="">So other packages can have `libswiftCore.so` ... as package dependency.</div><div class="">In addition to this the Swift compiler can be offered as `.deb` package, too.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">On OS X it is also enough to run the `swift-[...]-osx.pkg` installer.<br class=""><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="" style="font-family: SourceCodePro-Regular;">That said, we would welcome concrete proposals for how to improve the support for portable or distributable binaries. Those proposals should take into account whatever is happening with regard to system Swift packages.<br class=""></blockquote></blockquote><div class=""><br class=""></div><br class=""><blockquote type="cite" class="">In a previous thread, someone asked about statically linking in libswiftCore. That seems like a reasonable configuration to support on Linux to get easily-deployable independent binaries.<br class=""></blockquote><br class="">I have read the thread: "building static binaries / reducing library dependencies?" <<a href="https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-users/2015-December/000008.html" class="">https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-users/2015-December/000008.html</a>><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I don’t know if static linking can lead to license problems. </div><div class="">For example, if I want to publish something with the GPL License.<br class=""></div></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">P.S. I apologize for my English. I am a German student.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" class="">– Ugo</pre></body></html>