From owner-freebsd-current Sat Sep 19 09:28:16 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id JAA17602 for freebsd-current-outgoing; Sat, 19 Sep 1998 09:28:16 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from fep2-orange.clear.net.nz (fep2-orange.clear.net.nz [203.97.32.2]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id JAA17597 for ; Sat, 19 Sep 1998 09:28:14 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jabley@buddha.clear.net.nz) Received: from buddha.clear.net.nz (buddha.clear.net.nz [192.168.24.106]) by fep2-orange.clear.net.nz (1.5/1.9) with ESMTP id EAA14054; Sun, 20 Sep 1998 04:27:44 +1200 (NZST) Received: (from jabley@localhost) by buddha.clear.net.nz (8.9.1/8.9.1) id EAA12182 for freebsd-current@freebsd.org; Sun, 20 Sep 1998 04:27:42 +1200 (NZST) Message-ID: <19980920042741.A6144@clear.co.nz> Date: Sun, 20 Sep 1998 04:27:41 +1200 From: Joe Abley To: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: ELF ldconfig Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 0.93.2i X-Files: the Truth is Out There Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG Hi all, I have a (possibly naieve) question about the ELF ldconfig hints file. The ELF hints file is built by sbin/ldconfig/elfhints.c, which is very particular about the files in the search path it will include - for example, in /usr/local/lib, libslang.so.1.2.2 is built by the slang port, but no link under the name libslang.so.1 is present. Since ldconfig currently won't accept libslang.so.1.2.2 as a valid name for a library to be cached, ldconfig -r won't list it - and hence trying to build other ports (like mutt) that depend on finding slang\\.1\\. in the ldconfig -r output is a bit futile. The ports build of X11R6 does exactly the same thing - /usr/X11R6/lib/libX11.so.6.1 is created, but since no symlink named libX11.so.6 exists, ldconfig doesn't pick it up. Might I suggest that elfhints.c could be extended to recognise other names of the correct type in the search path which don't conform to the ^lib[a-z]+\.so\.[0-9]$ pattern? Would this have an adverse impact on anything else? If this is the way to go, then I'm happy to suggest a patch - I'm just hoping that I'm all wrong about this, and that there is something very basic and simple that would be better :) As an alternative, the whole of the ports collection could be updated to install correct symlinks using names understood by ldconfig, but this seems like a major job if we're looking at a 3.0 release in under thirty days. Joe -- Joe Abley Tel +64 9 912-4065, Fax +64 9 912-5008 Network Architect, CLEAR Net http://www.clear.net.nz/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message