Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/22/05 11:23 CST: > I read the thread that Jack gave and Gerard wants to keep the links in > both places: /usr/lib because they are needed and /lib for consistency. > After all, this is primarily an LFS issue and only marginally a BLFS > issue. Additionally, I suspect they are needed on /lib in the case that > ld.so.cache becomes unavailable for some reason.
Well, then, I suppose the LFS gang needs to all get on the same page. The Readline and Shadow instructions don't agree with what you say above. Furthermore, here's the million dollar question: When we update BLFS to go to Shadow-4.0.7, do we install it as LFS does, or do we install it differently (include the .so symlink in /lib)? To me, however the Shadow instructions are done in BLFS, the PAM instructions should match. -- Randy rmlinux: [GNU ld version 2.15.91.0.2 20040727] [gcc (GCC) 3.4.1] [GNU C Library 2004-07-01 release version 2.3.4] [Linux 2.6.8.1 i686] 11:28:00 up 16 days, 19:17, 8 users, load average: 0.04, 0.07, 0.08 -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
