Re: ZoomFloppy with OpenCBM / VICE

From: Groepaz <>
Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2012 14:02:13 +0100
Message-Id: <>
On Thursday 06 December 2012, you wrote:
> >>> VICE@MacOSX defaults to look for libopencbm in this location
> >>> "/opt/opencbm/lib/libopencbm.dylib"
> >> 
> >> Now that's strange.. a hardcoded path to a nonstandard location?! I mean
> >> stuff installed with DarwinPorts goes to /opt/local/lib.. others are in
> >> /usr/lib or usr/local/lib and why to hardcode the path in the first
> >> place.. ?
> > 
> > The assumption has been that most MacOSX users would use DarwinPorts (now
> > MacPorts) as their source for OpenCBM in respect to VICE.
> It may well be the case (most I mean) but still: a source level hard coded
> path?? There are no hard coded paths for neither Linux nor Windows in the
> very same source file. And this is how it should be. A file in the source
> tree of a multiplatform application can't know where this or that lib
> resides on a end user system.
> > The fact that your library is not in that location tells me that you've
> > pulled the OpenCBM source and built it from scratch
> > 
> > Are you running OpenCBM trunk ?
> Actually I used ports to install OpenCBM. And the library landed (precisely
> as I would expect) in /opt/local/lib. If some port files place it
> elsewhere, that is IMHO a quasi bug to be addressed.
> But - as you mentioned - I could have compiled it from scratch myself. And
> in such case I would expect it to land in /usr/local/lib.. which would be
> another place that would not work. No.. hard coding paths is a bad idea,
> really.

what about reporting it on the bugtracker instead of complaining on an 
unrelated mailinglist? =P


Millions of Americans own dogs, because they are good-natured, simple, and 
easily amused. I am referring here to the Americans. 
<Dave Barry>

       Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing list
Received on 2012-12-06 14:00:10

Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.