The bst way to find the names of dynamic libraries... cd to dx/bin_linux and type:
ldd * This should output the names of all the libraries dynamically linked to executables. You can check if you have the same dynamic libraries on your system, if not setup symbolic links. Unfortunately, RedHat uses weird names for libstdc++.so and change them to weird names each time they release a new rpm of libstdc++. I do not have a valid explaination why RedHat developers love to rename libstdc++ to something soooooooooo weird which causes applications compiled on one version of RedHat to break on other version of RedHat. It is a nightmare for developers. It would be a whole lot easier, if they stick to standard libstdc++.so. I am RedHat Beta team for RedHat upcoming release of RH 7.0. I will raise this question on their beta-testers site. I hope they listen and stop susing the weird libstdc++ blah blah numbers from one RPM release to another. Suhaib > Hi- > > Following the suggestion from Tom Gardiner, I have examined the soft > links for libstdc in /usr/lib. Here is what is currently setup: > > > 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 30 May 22 19:07 > libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 -> libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so > 0 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 31 May 22 19:07 > libstdc++-libc6.1-2.so.3 -> libstdc++-3-libc6.1-2-2.10.0.so > > Note, I have the link libstdc++-libc6.1-2.so.3 -> > libstdc++-3-libc6.1-2-2.10.0.so. This differs from what Tom identified > (i.e., libstdc++-libc6.1-2.so.3 -> libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so). > > Also note, I am running a very recent snapshot of the gcc suite of > compilers. The rpm packages for the dynamic libraries > libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so and ibstdc++-3-libc6.1-2-2.10.0.so are > libstdc++-compat-2.95.3-0.20000323 and libstdc++-2.95.3-0.20000323, > respectively. Does this seem to be ok? > > One last thing, I am using the rpm package for opendx-4.1.0-1. I have > found README files in /usr/local/dx/doc but have not been able to locate > any specific instructions dealing with setting links to libstdc. If > anyone could point towards where I can find this information, I would > appreciate it. > > TIA, > Steve > > > > -- > Steve Ettorre > e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > ------------------------------------------- > "...thinking is not consciousness - > it requires hard work..." - Rush Limbaugh > ------------------------------------------- > >
