Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 22:13:10 +0200 From: Mel <fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Cc: Edward Capriolo <edlinuxguru@gmail.com>, Shelby Cain <scain@exgenesis.com> Subject: Re: Invoking ldconfig without arguments wipes all hints and makes me very sad Message-ID: <200804112213.11326.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> In-Reply-To: <1207924977.29840.7.camel@localhost> References: <1207855812.11735.39.camel@localhost> <200804110035.04406.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> <1207924977.29840.7.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200804112213.11326.fbsd.questions>