/lib symlinks problem? (was: Re: __fpclassifyd)

[Alexander Leidinger]

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 09:19:07 -0700
Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:

> Are you linking in libc?
> 
> troutmask:kargl[207] nm -D /usr/lib/libc.so | grep fpcl
> 000b0040 T __fpclassifyd
> 000afff0 T __fpclassifyf
> 000b00a0 T __fpclassifyl

I think the problem is, that some tools have a problem finding it...:
---snip---
(3) netchild at ttyp1 % nm -D /usr/lib/libc.so | grep fpcl
nm: /usr/lib/libc.so: No such file or directory

(4) netchild at ttyp1 % ll /usr/lib/libc.so
lrwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  19B 29 Aug 13:57 /usr/lib/libc.so@ -> ../../lib/libc.so.5

(5) netchild at ttyp1 % ll /usr 
lrwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  7.0B 18 Aug  2001 /usr@ -> big/usr

(7) netchild at ttyp1 % ll /lib/libc.so 
lrwxr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  9.0B 29 Aug 13:57 /lib/libc.so@ -> libc.so.5
---snip---

I think a workaround would be to use absolute symlinks (at least as an
option).


David O'Brien wrote:

> Yes, your libs + binaries are out of sync with each other.
> You may also have stale ".so" symlinks in /usr/lib.  One gets this if one
> runs a certain 4.x binary on 5.1.

This was an update of an -current since ever system from Aug 2 src to
Aug 28 src. I just tried to recompile cdrdao.

Bye,
Alexander.

-- 
   If Bill Gates had a dime for every time a Windows box crashed...
                ...Oh, wait a minute, he already does.

http://www.Leidinger.net                       Alexander @ Leidinger.net
  GPG fingerprint = C518 BC70 E67F 143F BE91  3365 79E2 9C60 B006 3FE7