[Sorry for delay. It takes me about his long to cycle through all the
various subscriptions (too many) that I'm on.]
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Dr. David Kirkby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>I' pretty new to linux, so /usr/local/lib was not in /etc/ld.so.conf.
>However, I have since added it, run ldconfig (without any options) and
>still it fails at the same point. What I did notice however is that
>running ldconfig -v gives a long list of libraries for every
>directory, but none for /usr/local/lib.
>
>
>/usr/lib/atlas:
> libblas.so.2 -> libblas.so.2.3
> liblapack.so.2 -> liblapack.so.2.3
>/usr/local/lib:
>/lib:
> libgcc_s.so.1 -> libgcc_s.so.1
> libnss_db.so.2 -> libnss_db-2.2.so
> libwrap.so.0 -> libwrap.so.0.7.6
>
>Is this a bad sign ?
If there are files located in /usr/local/lib, then indeed this is a bad
sign. In that case, you'll probably be better off asking for help in a
Linux specific discussion area (or pester a local guru).
Good luck,
mrc
--
Mike Castle [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
fatal ("You are in a maze of twisty compiler features, all different"); -- gcc
