I downloaded this:

https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/download/v0.14.0/ldc2-0.14.0-osx-x86_64.tar.gz

Extracted it, then created a symlink from ~/bin/ldc2 to the extracted binary.

Then, if I run ldc2 from this symlink, I get this:

dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/libconfig++.9.dylib
  Referenced from: /Users/pja/bin/ldc2
  Reason: image not found
Trace/BPT trap: 5

I've "fixed" it by not creating the symlink and instead just adding the ldc2 bin path to my $PATH, but I was wondering if there is anything ldc2 can do to avoid this (can libconfig++ be statically linked)? Just worried that other people might run into the same, scary-looking error and abandon ldc2. Would be a shame.

On 18/09/14 22:55, Peter Alexander wrote:
> I downloaded this:
>
> https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc/releases/download/v0.14.0/ldc2-0.14.0-osx-x86_64.tar.gz
>
>
> Extracted it, then created a symlink from ~/bin/ldc2 to the extracted
> binary.
>
> Then, if I run ldc2 from this symlink, I get this:
>
> dyld: Library not loaded: @executable_path/libconfig++.9.dylib
>    Referenced from: /Users/pja/bin/ldc2
>    Reason: image not found
> Trace/BPT trap: 5
>
> I've "fixed" it by not creating the symlink and instead just adding the
> ldc2 bin path to my $PATH, but I was wondering if there is anything ldc2
> can do to avoid this (can libconfig++ be statically linked)? Just
> worried that other people might run into the same, scary-looking error
> and abandon ldc2. Would be a shame.

Hmm, looks like it searches for libconfig++ relative to the executable path. If I recall correctly that load path can be changed using the command line tool "install_name_tool". To be able to use that properly LDC can help by building with the "-headerpad_max_install_names" flag.

Alternatively I guess you can just symlink the libconfig++ as well to the same location as the symlink for the executable.

Of course, static linking would be easiest.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 19 Sep 2014, at 8:08, Jacob Carlborg via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:
> Of course, static linking would be easiest.

Yes. If somebody could investigate how to integrate building a static version of libconfig++ into our packaging scripts [1], that would be awesome.

Cheers,
David


[1] https://github.com/ldc-developers/ldc-scripts/tree/master/ldc2-packaging

On 19/09/14 10:18, David Nadlinger via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:

> Yes. If somebody could investigate how to integrate building a static
> version of libconfig++ into our packaging scripts [1], that would be
> awesome.

There's a static version of libconfig available from Macports. Just a matter to add a linker flag indicating it should link with the static library.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg