From owner-freebsd-questions  Wed Jan 21 17:37:54 1998
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG>
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id RAA24672
          for questions-outgoing; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:37:54 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG)
Received: from ns.usac.edu.gt (ns.usac.edu.gt [168.234.52.2])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with SMTP id RAA24654
          for <questions@freefall.freebsd.org>; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 17:37:38 -0800 (PST)
          (envelope-from victor@usac.edu.gt)
Received: from localhost by ns.usac.edu.gt; (5.65/1.1.8.2/17Apr97-1150AM)
	id AA23650; Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:32:16 -0600
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 1998 19:32:16 -0600 (GMT-0600)
From: Victor Manuel Carranza Gonzalez <victor@usac.edu.gt>
To: Doug White <dwhite@resnet.uoregon.edu>
Cc: FreeBSD Questions mailing list <questions@freefall.freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: ld.so and 3.0-SNAP
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.980121135946.5192B-100000@gdi.uoregon.edu>
Message-Id: <Pine.OSF.3.96.980121192218.23265A-100000@ns.usac.edu.gt>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, 21 Jan 1998, Doug White wrote:

> You need to reinstall the related package/port.  Which library was
> reported missing?

One of them was libtermcap.so.2.1
In fact, I found that the missing libraries were the ones with names 
ending with .2.1, and there were similar ones in the system, but named
xxxx.so.3.0, so I made a soft link with the xxx.so.2.1 name and it worked
fine, but I'm sure this is not the real solution...

By the way, the Pine package was installed from the same 3.0-SNAP CD.

Is it advisable to use the soft-link method with all future "missing
library" errors?  It did never happen before with my 2.1.x and 2.2.5
boxes.

Thanks,

Victor