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 a

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

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

/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 thin