Suhaib- In the interim, I tried resetting the link for libstdc++ as you noted. However, it had no apparent effect. ld.so still complains when I try to run dx. Do any of your colleagues at Redhat have any suggestions?
-S. -------------------------------------------------------------------- "Suhaib M. Siddiqi" wrote: > > 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). > > Try > > cd /usr/lib > > rm -rf libstdc++-libc6.1-2.so.3 > > then > > ln -s 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? > > > > It should be OK, as long as create proper symbolic links manunally. > > Suhaib -- Steve Ettorre e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------- "...thinking is not consciousness - it requires hard work..." - Rush Limbaugh -------------------------------------------
