Subject: Re: ld.so.conf?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: der Mouse <mouse@Rodents.Montreal.QC.CA>
Date: 08/18/1999 01:07:17
>>> I believe that not having a system wide way to set library search
>>> path defaults is ludicrous
> <AOL>Me too, dammit!</AOL>
Me too. I've read the ELF FAQ
(http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/elf.html) and seen many of the
reasons why ldconfig and friends are an inadequate facility for many
However, there are many others for which they are entirely adequate,
and indeed preferable to having to relink everything (which seems to be
the only alternative with the current ELF scheme).
All the reasons listed[%] are good reasons why ldconfig should not be
the only library-search-path facility available. None of them are
reasons why it is a facility that should not be available.
[%] Possibly excepting the fifth one. This one is especially specious;
it's basically saying "if we take this to its logical extreme the
result is ludicrous, so we shouldn't move in that direction at
all". Practically anything, taken to its logical extreme, ends up
7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B