Suhaib- Thanks for the tip. Unfortunately, when I tried to implement it here is what happened:
/usr/local/dx/bin_linux dad.27% ldd * builder: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! dxexec: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! dxui: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! prompter: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! startupui: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! tutor: BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER ld.so: dl-version.c: 210: _dl_check_map_versions: Assertion `needed != ((void *)0)' failed! Not very promising - is it? -S. ---------------------------------------------------------------- "Suhaib M. Siddiqi" wrote: > 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 > > ------------------------------------------- > > > > -- Steve Ettorre e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- "...thinking is not consciousness - it requires hard work..." - Rush Limbaugh -------------------------------------------
