Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable
file in /bin or /sbin, it needs
Jim Gifford wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable
file in /bin or /sbin, it needs to be in /lib. Th
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jim Gifford wrote:
.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable
file in /bin or /sbin, it needs to be in /lib. There should be no
l
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/22/05 00:27 CST:
Jim Gifford wrote:
.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable file
in /bin o
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/22/05 00:27 CST:
> Jim Gifford wrote:
>
>>.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
>
> I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
> is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable file
> in /bin or /sbin
Jim Gifford wrote:
.so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
I'm not sure what you are saying here Jim. If the library file
is either referenced as a symlink or a regular file by an excutable file
in /bin or /sbin, it needs to be in /lib. There should be no links from
/lib to a
Jim Gifford wrote these words on 02/21/05 23:57 CST:
> .so files belong in /usr/lib .so.version belong in /lib.
And to further clarify, .so *symlinks* belong in /usr/lib. Binaries
that are named somelibname.version.so may belong in /lib.
--
Randy
rmlinux: [GNU ld version 2.15.91.0.2 20040727]
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Linux-PAM installs the following libraries into the /lib directory:
libpam, libpamc and libpam_misc. Both static and dynamic libs are
installed.
The instructions move the .a libs to /usr/lib and create .so symlinks
to the /lib/libname.so.0.78 files i
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/21/05 23:31 CST:
> Randy McMurchy wrote:
>>It is my understanding that the .so files, like the .a files are only
>>used for linking during compilation of other programs.
>
> Incorrect. They are loaded when the program is loaded. If they are
> already in memo
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/21/05 23:04 CST:
It is my understanding that the .so files, like the .a files are only
used for linking during compilation of other programs.
Incorrect. They are loaded when the program is loaded. If they are
already in memory, they do
Bruce Dubbs wrote these words on 02/21/05 23:04 CST:
> Programs like login use PAM and must have the PAM libraries available
> even if /usr is not mounted, so the .so files must be available in /lib.
> Symlinks within or to /lib are ok.
It is my understanding that the .so files, like the .a f
Randy McMurchy wrote:
Hi all,
Linux-PAM installs the following libraries into the /lib directory:
libpam, libpamc and libpam_misc. Both static and dynamic libs are
installed.
The instructions move the .a libs to /usr/lib and create .so symlinks
to the /lib/libname.so.0.78 files in /usr/lib as well.
Hi all,
Linux-PAM installs the following libraries into the /lib directory:
libpam, libpamc and libpam_misc. Both static and dynamic libs are
installed.
The instructions move the .a libs to /usr/lib and create .so symlinks
to the /lib/libname.so.0.78 files in /usr/lib as well.
What I'm curious a
Jack Brown wrote these words on 02/21/05 20:54 CST:
> Well, we do log failures in /var/log/btmp, and when I run the faillog
> command it only lists faild logins by recognised users. lastb does
> report the logins by unrecognised users, but just list's them as
> unknown. Also without the log f
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
Jack Brown wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious, why we don't create a /var/log/faillog file when we
create the other log files for shadow? I've been using it on my own
system for quite a while and it seems to work fine with login from
shadow.
I'm also wondering if I should be making
Hi guys,
This message to lfs-dev/support and blfs-dev/support. People on the other
lists will read this so not cross-posting more than necessary.
As you all know, or may have suspected anyway, the search engine hasn't been
updating lately. It worked in that it returned results, but it wasn't up
i think the openssl man pages overwrite some of the standard ones.
for instance try man 3 rand. is this just me? has this been
discussed?
handsome greg
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above informa
Hi guys,
I left out some lists but I'm sure everybody on the other lists will read this
too through these three lists.
Is CVS still used by anybody? I know all the books use SVN now. How about
things like alfs profiles? From the commit messages to alfs-log it looks all
SVN to me.
I am pretty
Jack Brown wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious, why we don't create a /var/log/faillog file when we
create the other log files for shadow? I've been using it on my own
system for quite a while and it seems to work fine with login from shadow.
I'm also wondering if I should be making my faillog writable
Jack Brown wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious, why we don't create a /var/log/faillog file when we
create the other log files for shadow? I've been using it on my own
system for quite a while and it seems to work fine with login from shadow.
I'm also wondering if I should be making my faillog writable
Hi,
I'm curious, why we don't create a /var/log/faillog file when we
create the other log files for shadow? I've been using it on my own
system for quite a while and it seems to work fine with login from shadow.
I'm also wondering if I should be making my faillog writable by the
utmp group
xorg released 6.8.2 Feb 9, 2005. I've run here it here since the 10th,
no problems. It fixes crashes I have had on a vintage radeon and has
the 681-CAN bug fixes. Current instructions are correct.
IMHO, it should be marked for inclusion in the release.
---
David Jensen
--
http://linuxfromscra
22 matches
Mail list logo
