/lib/foo.so.X - /usr/lib/foo.so

2003-09-04 Thread Ruslan Ermilov
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:58:39PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: [...] The patch is not a problem (attached). I've been looking at how our friends do this. NetBSD has symlinks in /usr/lib to /lib, both to .so and .so.X, and their cc(1) and ld(1) don't look things in /lib. Linux looks things

Re: /lib/foo.so.X - /usr/lib/foo.so

2003-09-04 Thread David O'Brien
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 11:27:15PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:58:39PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: [...] The patch is not a problem (attached). I've been looking at how our friends do this. NetBSD has symlinks in /usr/lib to /lib, both to .so and .so.X, and

Re: /lib/foo.so.X - /usr/lib/foo.so

2003-09-04 Thread Dan Nelson
In the last episode (Sep 04), David O'Brien said: On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 11:27:15PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:58:39PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: [...] The patch is not a problem (attached). I've been looking at how our friends do this. NetBSD has

Re: /lib/foo.so.X - /usr/lib/foo.so

2003-09-04 Thread Mark Kettenis
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2003 14:10:50 -0700 From: David O'Brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 11:27:15PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:58:39PM +0300, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: [...] The patch is not a problem (attached). I've been looking at