From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 11 20:13:13 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9AE201065670 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:13:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net (rachie.is-a-geek.net [66.230.99.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 647568FC14 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:13:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by snoogles.rachie.is-a-geek.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 929191CD60; Fri, 11 Apr 2008 12:13:12 -0800 (AKDT) From: Mel To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:13:10 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 References: <1207855812.11735.39.camel@localhost> <200804110035.04406.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <1207924977.29840.7.camel@localhost> In-Reply-To: <1207924977.29840.7.camel@localhost> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-6" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200804112213.11326.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> Cc: Edward Capriolo , Shelby Cain Subject: Re: Invoking ldconfig without arguments wipes all hints and makes me very sad X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 20:13:13 -0000 On Friday 11 April 2008 16:42:57 Shelby Cain wrote: > On Fri, 2008-04-11 at 00:35 +0200, Mel wrote: > > It translates to "be verbose about restoring factory settings", because > > without arguments it will restore the built-in set. > > Why does "factory settings" not include scanning the built-in system > library path /usr/lib? From the man page, it would seem that if I truly > wanted to remove all runtime information I'd want to run something along > the lines of ldconfig -s. Am I misreading something? It should, otherwise it's a bug in either the manpage or ldconfig. > Also, under what circumstances does -v actually do something? I can't > seem to find a case where -v actually alters the output of ldconfig. When it does something. For example, if your cache contains libfoo.so.1 and you installed /usr/local/lib/libfoo.so.2, then ldconfig -vm /usr/local/lib will print: Updating libfoo.so.1.0 to /usr/local/lib/libfoo.so.2 -- Mel Problem with today's modular software: they start with the modules and never get to the software part.