Guy Harris
changed
bug 10185
What |
Removed |
Added |
Priority |
Low
|
High
|
Status |
UNCONFIRMED
|
CONFIRMED
|
Version |
Git
|
1.12.0
|
Summary |
OSX: Developer release will not start
|
OS X: 1.12.0rc2 developer release will not start
|
Ever confirmed |
|
1
|
Severity |
Major
|
Blocker
|
Comment # 1
on bug 10185
from Guy Harris
Happens for me, too. libfiletap *is* in the Contents/Frameworks subdirectory
of the app bundle, along with the other Wireshark shared libraries.
otool -l on Contents/Resources/bin/wireshark-bin reports:
Load command 52
cmd LC_RPATH
cmdsize 40
path @executable_path/../lib (offset 12)
Load command 53
cmd LC_RPATH
cmdsize 48
path @executable_path/../Frameworks (offset 12)
The dyld man page says
@executable_path/
This variable is replaced with the path to the directory con-
taining the main executable for the process. This is useful for
loading dylibs/frameworks embedded in a .app directory. If the
main executable file is at /some/path/My.app/Contents/MacOS/My
and a framework dylib file is at /some/path/My.app/Con-
tents/Frameworks/Foo.framework/Versions/A/Foo, then the frame-
work load path could be encoded as @executable_path/../Frame-
works/Foo.framework/Versions/A/Foo and the .app directory could
be moved around in the file system and dyld will still be able
to load the embedded framework.
so @executable path would be /Applications/Wireshark.app/Contents/Resources/bin
and @executable_path/../Frameworks would be
/Applications/Wireshark.app/Contents/Resources/bin/../Frameworks, i.e.
/Applications/Wireshark.app/Contents/Resources/Frameworks, which doesn't exist.
Either:
1) the rpath entry @executable_path/../lib should be removed, as there's no
lib directory, and the rpath entry @executable_path/../Frameworks needs to be
changed to @executable_path/../../Frameworks
or
2) the rpath entry @executable_path/../Frameworks should be removed, and
the libraries should be put in Contents/Resources/lib rather than
Contents/Frameworks.
I suspect this is a side-effect of going with Qt and then going back to GTK+
for 1.12.0, so I suspect the right thing to do for 1.12.0 is 2), which I think
undoes some of the "going with Qt" changes for the OS X packaging.
You are receiving this mail because:
- You are watching all bug changes.