RE: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install
Thanks for the update Gwenole. > > The maintainer is listening but he won't repeat the same things > endlessly. > Warly fixed the hdlist problem, i.e. that's not a package problem. > However, it does seem to reappear. > > Short story: Stefan tried to upload a glibc but obviously that was > rejected but not completetly. I further uploaded the right > version-release > to also replace ldconfig & timezone packages that could go in. > > Anyhow, there will be a new glibc package to address an LSB regression > occuring because of a kernel bug. > > Bye, > Gwenole. >
RE: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003, Gerald Drouillard wrote: > This issue has been talked about on the list but it doesn't appear that > the maintainer of the package is listening. The maintainer is listening but he won't repeat the same things endlessly. Warly fixed the hdlist problem, i.e. that's not a package problem. However, it does seem to reappear. Short story: Stefan tried to upload a glibc but obviously that was rejected but not completetly. I further uploaded the right version-release to also replace ldconfig & timezone packages that could go in. Anyhow, there will be a new glibc package to address an LSB regression occuring because of a kernel bug. Bye, Gwenole.
RE: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install
Excellent. Many thanks for your assistance (my find doesn't seem to be working in evolution right now :( ) Nelson On Wed, 2003-06-04 at 13:50, Gerald Drouillard wrote: > This issue has been talked about on the list but it doesn't appear that the > maintainer of the package is listening. A workaround is to do a minimal 9.1 > install then upgrade to cooker. > > > > -Original Message- > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nelson Bartley > > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 1:27 PM > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Subject: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install > > > > > > Heyo, > > > > Not sure if this issue has been addressed, however over the last 2 days > > I have been attempting to perform an HD install of cooker, with little > > success. It appears that every time the installer is fired up, and > > commences package instalation it errors on ldconfig-2.3.2-3mdk.i586.rpm, > > and according to the text screens in the installer it just returns bad > > package. > > > > Now the wierd thing is I can install a 9.1 install, then install that > > same package into the 9.1 w/o any troubles what soever. > > > > Has anyone else noticed this issue? I have delete the file twice, > > resync'd from sunet.se, however I cannot complete an install without > > this package. > > > > Thanks, > > > > -- > > Nelson Bartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > -- Nelson Bartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
RE: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install
This issue has been talked about on the list but it doesn't appear that the maintainer of the package is listening. A workaround is to do a minimal 9.1 install then upgrade to cooker. > -Original Message- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nelson Bartley > Sent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 1:27 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install > > > Heyo, > > Not sure if this issue has been addressed, however over the last 2 days > I have been attempting to perform an HD install of cooker, with little > success. It appears that every time the installer is fired up, and > commences package instalation it errors on ldconfig-2.3.2-3mdk.i586.rpm, > and according to the text screens in the installer it just returns bad > package. > > Now the wierd thing is I can install a 9.1 install, then install that > same package into the 9.1 w/o any troubles what soever. > > Has anyone else noticed this issue? I have delete the file twice, > resync'd from sunet.se, however I cannot complete an install without > this package. > > Thanks, > > -- > Nelson Bartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >
[Cooker] ldconfig package on hd install
Heyo, Not sure if this issue has been addressed, however over the last 2 days I have been attempting to perform an HD install of cooker, with little success. It appears that every time the installer is fired up, and commences package instalation it errors on ldconfig-2.3.2-3mdk.i586.rpm, and according to the text screens in the installer it just returns bad package. Now the wierd thing is I can install a 9.1 install, then install that same package into the 9.1 w/o any troubles what soever. Has anyone else noticed this issue? I have delete the file twice, resync'd from sunet.se, however I cannot complete an install without this package. Thanks, -- Nelson Bartley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[Cooker] ldconfig-2.4.10-2mdk
Any time ldconfig is installed/upgraded it does so without problem or complaint. But there is a problem. Anyone who uses WP8 needs ld.so-1.9.11-4mdk which ldconfig overwrites. Knowing this the fix is simple, reinstall ld.so-1.9.11-4mdk, but most would not even know what was causing the problem with WP, much less how to fix it. Would it not be possible for ldconfig to check for ld.so and give a conflict warning if ld.so is found. Charles (-:
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
On August 21, 2001 03:46 am, you wrote: > "J.P.Pasnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > !, > > > > When anything calls 'ldconfig' I get the following: > > > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is not a symbolic link > > > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_nsplugin.so is not a symbolic link > > > > Any ideas? > > this is a bug in the KDE packages not in ldconfig. Thanks, thats what I figured, but I just wanted to make sure I wasn't the only one having the problem -- "Live fast, die young, you're sucking up my bandwidth" J.P. Pasnak, CD Warped Systems http://www.warpedsystems.sk.ca http://canopener.ca
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
"J.P.Pasnak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > !, > > When anything calls 'ldconfig' I get the following: > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkatecore.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkateinterfaces.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_keyboard.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_xmlrpcd.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqaboutpage.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqsidebar.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqsidebarplugin.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is not a symbolic link > > /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_nsplugin.so is not a symbolic link > > Any ideas? this is a bug in the KDE packages not in ldconfig.
[Cooker] ldconfig
!, When anything calls 'ldconfig' I get the following: /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkatecore.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkateinterfaces.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_keyboard.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_xmlrpcd.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqaboutpage.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqsidebar.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonqsidebarplugin.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is not a symbolic link /sbin/ldconfig: /usr/lib/libkcm_nsplugin.so is not a symbolic link Any ideas? -- "Live fast, die young, you're sucking up my bandwidth" J.P. Pasnak, CD Warped Systems http://www.warpedsystems.sk.ca http://canopener.ca
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig always complains
OS <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Hello, > > Could some nice kind person tell me how to stop ldconfig to stop complaining > "/usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is not a symbolic link". > > I can easily make it a symbolic link ! but then everytime I update KDE the > warning comes back 'cos /usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is created solid and not > as a link. fixed in kdebase...5mdk
[Cooker] ldconfig always complains
Hello, Could some nice kind person tell me how to stop ldconfig to stop complaining "/usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is not a symbolic link". I can easily make it a symbolic link ! but then everytime I update KDE the warning comes back 'cos /usr/lib/libkonsolepart.so is created solid and not as a link. Thanks, Owen
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig...
Patrick Poncet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > > > Patrick Poncet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > When installing new packages running ldconfig, I get the following > > > error... Running ldconfig from the command line does the same... That > > > after upgrading glibc. > > > > > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_nis.so.1 (No such file or > > > directory), skipping > > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_files.so.1 (No such file or > > > directory), skipping > > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_dns.so.1 (No such file or > > > directory), skipping > > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_compat.so.1 (No such file or > > > directory), skipping > > > > > > Any idea??? Thanks in advance > > > > you can rm -f it, (what we maybe should do in %post of glibc), it's > > when upgrading glibc-2.1.3 to glibc-2.2 > > > > rm -f what??? the broken link or upgrade to the last glibc-2.2 package where it's done now automatically. -- MandrakeSoft Inc http://www.chmouel.org --Chmouel
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig...
Chmouel Boudjnah wrote: > > Patrick Poncet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > When installing new packages running ldconfig, I get the following > > error... Running ldconfig from the command line does the same... That > > after upgrading glibc. > > > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_nis.so.1 (No such file or > > directory), skipping > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_files.so.1 (No such file or > > directory), skipping > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_dns.so.1 (No such file or > > directory), skipping > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_compat.so.1 (No such file or > > directory), skipping > > > > Any idea??? Thanks in advance > > you can rm -f it, (what we maybe should do in %post of glibc), it's > when upgrading glibc-2.1.3 to glibc-2.2 > rm -f what???
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig...
Patrick Poncet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > When installing new packages running ldconfig, I get the following > error... Running ldconfig from the command line does the same... That > after upgrading glibc. > > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_nis.so.1 (No such file or > directory), skipping > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_files.so.1 (No such file or > directory), skipping > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_dns.so.1 (No such file or > directory), skipping > ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_compat.so.1 (No such file or > directory), skipping > > Any idea??? Thanks in advance you can rm -f it, (what we maybe should do in %post of glibc), it's when upgrading glibc-2.1.3 to glibc-2.2 -- MandrakeSoft Inc http://www.chmouel.org --Chmouel
[Cooker] ldconfig...
When installing new packages running ldconfig, I get the following error... Running ldconfig from the command line does the same... That after upgrading glibc. ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_nis.so.1 (No such file or directory), skipping ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_files.so.1 (No such file or directory), skipping ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_dns.so.1 (No such file or directory), skipping ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libnss_compat.so.1 (No such file or directory), skipping Any idea??? Thanks in advance
[Cooker] ldconfig error when upgrade qt2
[root@cloud RPMS]# rpm -Fvh qt* qt2 ## /sbin/ldconfig: warning: can't open var/tmp/rpm-tmp.92102 (Not a directory), skipping /sbin/ldconfig: warning: can't open 1 (No such file or directory), skipping qt2-devel ## qt2-doc ## -- Takika
[Cooker] ldconfig DURING_INSTALL hack
Please put a note in the %description to advise of hacks like this. I missed recent discussion but used DURING_INSTALL to prevent menu update. It took me some time to discover what was stopping ldconfig working. The hacked version doesn't even respond to ldconfig -v. - David.
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > [root@fulgore:/etc]# more ld.so.conf > /usr/lib > /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib > /usr/lib > /usr/lib [...] > /usr/lib > /usr/lib > [root@fulgore:/etc]# > > Well, this reduced the time for ldconfig to run from > 5-10 min to 1-2 min! hint, remove all occurence of /usr/lib, none is needed. You can cut some more time :)
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > Well, ldconfig also updates links and in some cases it > > > could cause and executable to not find the library (is > > > this right, or am I making this up? he, he) > > > > you're right i just find that pb. > > the good(?) solution is to patch those packages missing the link. eg: gpm, fixed > > now. > > what about adding to spec-helper the creation of the .so.%version to the soname > ? > The problem comes from the file list which cannot be modified by spec-helper. -- Fred - May the source be with you
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Well, ldconfig also updates links and in some cases it > > could cause and executable to not find the library (is > > this right, or am I making this up? he, he) > > you're right i just find that pb. > the good(?) solution is to patch those packages missing the link. eg: gpm, fixed > now. what about adding to spec-helper the creation of the .so.%version to the soname ?
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > --- Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > i've just tested. I thought without calling > > ldconfig, the binary would fail to > > load the dynamic library. But it's not true :) > > /etc/ld.so.cache is just for speedup. > > Well, ldconfig also updates links and in some cases it > could cause and executable to not find the library (is > this right, or am I making this up? he, he) you're right i just find that pb. the good(?) solution is to patch those packages missing the link. eg: gpm, fixed now. > > > i'm going to patch ldconfig so that it just returns > > $DURING_INSTALL, and see how > > that goes. > > You lost me here. Could you please explain what you > mean? I guess you mean ldconfig will only be run when > the package is installed with the -i? If so, this may > cause problems, since a lot of people (or scripts for > that matter) use -U always. $DURING_INSTALL is an environment variable set during install (in DrakX). It mainly means: "do not update current environment". This is usefull for post install script doing too "intelligent" stuff, that should *not* be done during install. This is also usefull for update-menus and (now) ldconfig
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
--- Pixel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > i've just tested. I thought without calling > ldconfig, the binary would fail to > load the dynamic library. But it's not true :) > /etc/ld.so.cache is just for speedup. Well, ldconfig also updates links and in some cases it could cause and executable to not find the library (is this right, or am I making this up? he, he) > i'm going to patch ldconfig so that it just returns > $DURING_INSTALL, and see how > that goes. You lost me here. Could you please explain what you mean? I guess you mean ldconfig will only be run when the package is installed with the -i? If so, this may cause problems, since a lot of people (or scripts for that matter) use -U always. Anyways, I think I found why it took ridiculously long for ldconfig to execute. I don't know why (I guess there is a bug in some package, but my /etc/ld.so.conf looked like this: [root@fulgore:/etc]# more ld.so.conf /usr/lib /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/X11R6/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib /usr/lib [root@fulgore:/etc]# Well, this reduced the time for ldconfig to run from 5-10 min to 1-2 min! But my previous points about it being run for every package (some times twice) are still valid, IMHO. = Eugenio Diaz, BSEE/BSCE Linux Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] __ Do You Yahoo!? Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger. http://im.yahoo.com/
Re: [Cooker] ldconfig
Eugenio Diaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...] > > I think this is a real problem for the RPM subsystem, wouldn't it be > wise to run this only once at the end when installing multiple packages? i've just tested. I thought without calling ldconfig, the binary would fail to load the dynamic library. But it's not true :) /etc/ld.so.cache is just for speedup. i'm going to patch ldconfig so that it just returns $DURING_INSTALL, and see how that goes. thanks, cu Pixel.
RE: [Cooker] ldconfig
> > > Has anyone notice that this days almost every rpm has an "ldconfig" > statement in the scripts. And almost always in both, the postinstall and > the postuninstal, making it execute twice during a package upgrade. > yeh, but have to make sure the new so files are properly registered. > To make things worse, we now have other things too, like update-menus, > that are run for every package installed. > > Is this really necessary? I mean, in my system (128MB, PPro200, 2x10.1GB > WD IDE in RAID0) "ldconfig" takes a really long time to run (like 5-10 > mins), making the upgrades of packages a real pain, since it is run at > least once for almost every package upgraded; and I upgrade packages > almost every day. funny thing that it would tkae that long ...it's taking exponential time. > > I think this is a real problem for the RPM subsystem, wouldn't it be > wise to run this only once at the end when installing multiple packages? > Obviously, some packages (even tough I don't know which ones would) will > need a current library map to install properly, but I guess most of them > doesn't. I think this problem should be addressed within RPM itself, and > not in the individual package scripts or in the distro. > then what method do you propose ? you must get ldconfig to run on the system somehow ...i SUPPOSE one way to address this, would be to > Any one care to comment about this? > > -- > Eugenio Diaz, BSEE/BSCE > Linux Engineer > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > >
[Cooker] ldconfig
Has anyone notice that this days almost every rpm has an "ldconfig" statement in the scripts. And almost always in both, the postinstall and the postuninstal, making it execute twice during a package upgrade. To make things worse, we now have other things too, like update-menus, that are run for every package installed. Is this really necessary? I mean, in my system (128MB, PPro200, 2x10.1GB WD IDE in RAID0) "ldconfig" takes a really long time to run (like 5-10 mins), making the upgrades of packages a real pain, since it is run at least once for almost every package upgraded; and I upgrade packages almost every day. I think this is a real problem for the RPM subsystem, wouldn't it be wise to run this only once at the end when installing multiple packages? Obviously, some packages (even tough I don't know which ones would) will need a current library map to install properly, but I guess most of them doesn't. I think this problem should be addressed within RPM itself, and not in the individual package scripts or in the distro. Any one care to comment about this? -- Eugenio Diaz, BSEE/BSCE Linux Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
