Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes:
> If, and perhaps that's too big an if, relative rpaths actually work despite
> SIP, it might be worth setting a relative install_rpath, because afaict that
> should then work both for a "real" installation and our temporary test one.
From what we know so far, it seems like SIP wouldn't interfere with
that (if it works at all). I think what SIP desires to prevent is
messing with a program's execution by setting DYLD_LIBRARY_PATH.
As long as the program executable itself is saying where to find
the library, I don't see why they should interfere with that.
(Again, it seems blindingly stupid to forbid this while not blocking
PATH or any of the other environment variables that have always affected
execution. But what do I know.)
> If absolute rpaths are required, it'd make the process a bit more expensive,
It'd also put the kibosh on relocatable install trees, though I dunno how
much people really care about that.
regards, tom lane