Date: Sun, 13 Jul 1997 04:45:42 -0500 From: Richard Wackerbarth <rkw@dataplex.net> To: Alan Lundin <aflundi@lundin.abq.nm.us> Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Heads up and and a call for a show of hands. Message-ID: <l03102801afee52a975ac@[208.2.87.4]> In-Reply-To: <199707130340.VAA04548@lundin.abq.nm.us.> References: "Richard Wackerbarth" <rkw@dataplex.net> "Re: Heads up and and a call for a show of hands." (Jul 11, 11:43am)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Alan Lundin <aflundi@lundin.abq.nm.us> replied:
>On Jul 11, 11:43am, "Richard Wackerbarth" wrote:
[...]
>> Why not get both effects. Have two config files, for example,
>> /etc/ld.so.conf and /usr/local/etc/ld.so.conf.
[...]
>Why not just source ld.so.conf if it exists then you
>can have either behavior depending on what is in ld.so.conf:
[...]
>and ld.so.conf can contain something like
>
> ${_LDC}="${_LDC} /my/new/lib/dir"
>
>for append behavior or
>
> ${_LDC}="/usr/X11R6/lib /my/new/lib/dir /usr/local/lib"
>
>for override behavior.
I don't think that your format gives them the flexability
that they wished to make it easy to have things automatically
install and deinstall. For the "manually edited" situation,
I would agree that it is a bit cleaner. However, it was by
inpression that they wanted to make it easy to automate
changes when packages come and go.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?l03102801afee52a975ac>