On Friday 22 February 2008, Amadeus W.M. wrote: >> Somehow I don't feel like offering any thanks when such roadblocks are >> strewn about. The ldconfig thing is breaking stuff just to lock us into >> the rpm camp if we're cautious & wanna stick with distro only SW. >> Absolutely NO mention of the new /etc/ld.so.conf.d directory, its usage >> or the 'include' directive which is now the only line in the installed >> /etc/ld.so.conf. I don't recall it existing in FC6. Such changes >> should be documented where they can be found with a simple man command >> if you want folks to be aware of them. > >I haven't seen anything wrong with ldconfig. You can add paths directly in >ld.so.conf if you wish. Then run ldconfig as root. Or, when you build a > package from source, you can ./configure it with the path set to /usr/ > rather than /usr/local (which is the default in many cases). Then the > libraries go directly into /usr/lib, etc. And IMO, that "prefix=/usr" leads down the garden path to a thoroughly hosed system at some point because a tarball build overwrites what rpm installs, keep them separate and miss-fires can then be fixed if one can figure it out, by nuking the /usr/local/lib version and re-running ldconfig to re-arrange the links. Yes, it was easy enough to fix ld.so.conf once I grokked that it might just accept the old syntax. But as I said, whoever added to the ld.so.conf by moving the extra to a subdir, really should have 50 lashes with a wet dishtowel for not also updating the man pages. -- Cheers, Gene "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) The louder he talked of his honour, the faster we counted our spoons. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
