From owner-freebsd-gnome@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 14 09:45:58 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCAAB16A4CE for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:45:58 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.gmx.net (imap.gmx.net [213.165.64.20]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C36C843D31 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:45:57 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from barner@gmx.de) Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 14 Mar 2005 09:45:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO zi025.glhnet.mhn.de) (129.187.19.157) by mail.gmx.net (mp005) with SMTP; 14 Mar 2005 10:45:56 +0100 X-Authenticated: #147403 Received: by zi025.glhnet.mhn.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D614AC5EF; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 10:46:08 +0100 (CET) Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 10:46:08 +0100 From: Simon Barner To: Chuck Robey Message-ID: <20050314094608.GA38375@zi025.glhnet.mhn.de> References: <20050313191932.O74062@april.chuckr.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20050313191932.O74062@april.chuckr.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 cc: FreeBSD-gnome@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: libm X-BeenThere: freebsd-gnome@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: GNOME for FreeBSD -- porting and maintaining List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:45:58 -0000 --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chuck Robey wrote: > I'm still trying to build gnome-2.10 ... it's broken right now in building > audio/arts. The current error is one that's becoming depressingly > familiar: moc died, it's missing a "libm.so.2". In the past, for all > these kind of errors, I would track down the executable that needed the > old libm, but I am wondering, maybe it wouldn't be all that horrible a > thing, to fake it out? >=20 > Would it work for me, do you think, to have a softlink, from libc to libm? > Woud it hurt anything? (As long as I didn't try to propagate anything that > wanted to use libm!) Would it actually work, solve that dependency > problem? >=20 > Or am I actually, for some reason, really better served by tracking down > the old software and relink it? That's a heck of a lot of extra work, you > understand, right? Chuck, just a wild guess: Is it possible that you have some ports on your system that were built in the 5.3-BETA7 time frame? A version bump for several libraries was performed then, and there was the advise to put the following into /etc/libmap.conf: # Handle shared lib version bump for 5.3-STABLE libm.so.2 libm.so.3 libreadline.so.4 libreadline.so.5 libhistory.so.4 libhistory.so.5 libopie.so.2 libopie.so.3 libpcap.so.2 libpcap.so.3 --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (FreeBSD) iD8DBQFCNV1gCkn+/eutqCoRAqS7AKCfAPKE93jR6cbgYfAIwO+byCLdDwCgo1jZ lAzfolZ29/VAHQKc/N2WpX8= =7BQ8 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --x+6KMIRAuhnl3hBn--