On Wed, Nov 07, 2012 at 01:08:37PM +0100, Frank Steinmetzger wrote: > On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 05:56:12PM -0800, walt wrote: > > > > Hello > > > […] > > > $ ams > > > ams: error while loading shared libraries: libclalsadrv.so.1: cannot open > > > shared object file: No such file or directory > > […] > […]
Summarising:
$ lddtree /usr/bin/ams
ams => /usr/bin/ams (interpreter => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2)
[...]
libclalsadrv.so.1 => not found
[...]
$ qlist libclalsadrv
/usr/share/doc/libclalsadrv-1.2.2/AUTHORS.bz2
/usr/include/clalsadrv.h
/usr/lib64/libclalsadrv.so
/usr/lib64/libclalsadrv.so.1.2.2
I’d like to file a bug report. But which one is the culprit in your opinion;
libclalsadrv for not providing a .so.1 link, or ams for stubbornly referencing
it in its executable? Of course the ams build log simply says for the linking:
x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-g++ ... -lclalsadrv ...
I’m just asking because I have a habit of making a fool of myself by reporting
stuff that turned out to be my own mistake or missing the point by a mile. :-/
--
Gruß | Greetings | Qapla'
Please do not share anything from, with or about me with any Facebook service.
I used to be vain, but now I know that I am beautiful.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
