On Wed, Nov 25, 1998, Albert Etienne wrote:
> If you remember, some time ago I suggested that the LD_LIBRARY_PATH needed to be
> modified, this seems to be about the same kind of error I was getting and adding it
> to the LD_LIBRARY_PATH did the trick. I guess it wasn't the right way to fix
> things. Does this make more sense now? Im not really sure how all the paths are
> used. I wish I still had a copy of the mail I sent you.
>[...]
Yes, I remember. Usually LD_LIBRARY_PATH is a variable for the _dynamic_
linker (ld.so) while -L is for the linker program. But perhaps on your system
"ld" looks alternatively inside LD_LIBRARY_PATH, too. Hmmm.. yes, this could
be also the root of your problems. I've fixed it now for 2.1.1, so we will see
if you need LD_LIBRARY_PATH in the future again. If yes, please complain
again. Because usually it should be _not_ needed.
Ralf S. Engelschall
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
www.engelschall.com
______________________________________________________________________
Apache Interface to SSLeay (mod_ssl) www.engelschall.com/sw/mod_ssl/
Official Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
