On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 13:48:46 +0100, Matthias Scheler wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:11:44PM +0400, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote:
> > Hmm, I've been always wondering, why we bother with
> > /usr/libexec/ld.elf_so at all, it's symlink to /libexec anyway.
> > 
> > Does anyone knows/remembers the rationale?
> 
> It's the default path used for all binaries. If you check e.g. "/usr/bin/vi"
> or "/usr/pkg/bin/<whatever>" you will notice that they all use
> "/usr/libexec/ld.elf_so".
> 
> Only "/bin", "/libexec" and "/sbin" use "/libexec/ld.elf_so" if the system
> is compiled to use a dynamic root (which is the default).

I know.  My question was why we don't use /libexec/ld.elf_so for all
of them?

SY, Uwe
-- 
uwe@stderr.spb.ru                       |       Zu Grunde kommen
http://snark.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/          |       Ist zu Grunde gehen