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 a
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
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
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 thin