Date: Fri, 4 Apr 1997 14:29:57 -0600 From: Jonathan Lemon <jlemon@americantv.com> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: smc@servtech.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD Elf-Kit and dynamic loading Message-ID: <19970404142957.41778@right.PCS> In-Reply-To: <199704041835.KAA24555@austin.polstra.com>; from John Polstra on Apr 04, 1997 at 10:35:07AM -0800 References: <5i0j1d$jtk@news.itfs.nsk.su> <19970403191209.52889@keltia.freenix.fr> <5i2k5h$4jb@news.itfs.nsk.su> <334525B9.167EB0E7@servtech.com> <199704041835.KAA24555@austin.polstra.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Apr 04, 1997 at 10:35:07AM -0800, John Polstra wrote:
>
> Now suppose you add a new version of the library, "libc.so.4". You
> change the symlink "libc.so" to point to the new version. Things
> work out the way they should. Existing executables that were linked
> against libc.so.3 still will use that same library, because the
> versioned name is recorded in them. When you build new programs,
> though, they'll use the newest library, because that's where the
> unversioned symlink points now.
>
> I didn't invent it. I just implemented it. :-)
My first reaction:
"Oh, yuck. You mean I have to remember to update a symlink whenever I
put in a new version of the shared libraries?!"
My second reaction:
"Oh, good. Now I have a way of dealing with certain l^Husers
who insist on having a libc.so.261 on some systems."
I guess there are benefits to this approach.
--
Jonathan
help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970404142957.41778>