[cad-linux] Re: ME10
- From: phrostie <pfrostie@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: cad-linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2002 20:14:36 -0400
see if this helps
on my debian woody box:
pfrostie@galveston:/usr/lib$ ls -al libstdc++-libc*
root root 30 Jul 7 15:28 libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 ->
libstdc++-2-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so
root root 31 Jul 7 16:11 libstdc++-libc6.1-2.so.3 ->
libstdc++-3-libc6.1-2-2.10.0.so
root root 30 Jul 7 15:27 libstdc++-libc6.2-2.a.3 ->
libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.a
root root 31 Jul 7 15:26 libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 ->
libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so
pfrostie@galveston:/usr/lib$ cd /usr/X11R6/lib/
pfrostie@galveston:/usr/X11R6/lib$ ls -al libX11.so*
root root 11 Jul 7 15:33 libX11.so -> libX11.so.6
root root 13 Jul 7 15:33 libX11.so.6 -> libX11.so.6.2
pfrostie@galveston:/usr/X11R6/lib$ cd /lib
pfrostie@galveston:/lib$ ls -al libm.so*
root root 13 Jul 7 15:00 libm.so.5 -> libm.so.5.0.9
root root 30244 Feb 4 16:30 libm.so.5.0.9
root root 13 Jul 7 15:00 libm.so.6 -> libm-2.2.5.so
pfrostie@galveston:/lib$ ls -al libdl.so.*
root root 15 Jul 7 15:00 libdl.so.1 -> libdl.so.1.9.11
root root 6200 Mar 6 2001 libdl.so.1.9.11
root root 14 Jul 7 15:00 libdl.so.2 -> libdl-2.2.5.so
pfrostie@galveston:/lib$ ls -al libc.so*
root root 14 Jul 7 15:00 libc.so.5 -> libc.so.5.4.46
root root 563068 Feb 4 16:30 libc.so.5.4.46
root root 13 Jul 7 15:00 libc.so.6 -> libc-2.2.5.so
pfrostie@galveston:/lib$ ls -al ld-linux.so.*
root root 18 Jul 7 15:00 ld-linux.so.1 -> ld-linux.so.1.9.11
root root 24817 Mar 6 2001 ld-linux.so.1.9.11
root root 11 Jul 7 15:00 ld-linux.so.2 -> ld-2.2.5.so
pfrostie@galveston:/lib$
On Wednesday 17 July 2002 22:51, you wrote:
> First I want to thank you all for helping out.
> All libraries listed by ldd were found exactly where they should have
> been, and were identical versions except for the numbers in parenthases, so
> it seems that no simlinks are needed. I installed the RPM with the package
> manager. (Elx uses the Red Hat Package Manager) Install went off without
> errors. One would assume that any dependancies were met. Any other ideas?
>
> Ernie
>
> On Wednesday 17 July 2002 10:10 pm, you wrote:
> > In a message dated 7/17/2002 9:20:22 PM Eastern Standard Time,
> >
> > pfrostie@xxxxxxxxx writes:
> > > On Wednesday 17 July 2002 21:01, you wrote:
> > > > ldd compares except for the #'s in parentheses in 4 of 6 cases Is
> > > > that significant?
> > >
> > > could be, we have some people on the list that are better at the lib
> > > stuff then me. i'm hoping they will jump in.
> >
> > I'll give it a try: Quoting form "Using Caldera Open Linux" published by
> > Que, copyright 1999, page 349 "When a program is created, the linker
> > records the versions of the shared libraries that it requires in the
> > program file. You can examine which shared libraries an executable
> > program needs by using the ldd command."
> >
> > If I read this right then the ldd command only tells you which libraries
> > are necessary, not which libraries are available on your system. Did you
> > get any messages when you ran RPM (you should have if a library was
> > missing). Second thing I would check is that each of the libraries
> > exist, and make sure the symlinks are all correct and pointing to valid
> > library files. Actually - in the giving credit where credit is due
> > category: Keith is the one who has given me the most helpful explanations
> > about symlinks.
> >
> > The numbers in parenthesis look a lot like hexadecimal numbers, and if I
> > had to make a guess they point to a memory location somewhere. I don't
> > know if they are significant or not, I could not find a reference
> > explaining what they are or do.
> >
> > Hope this helps.
> >
> > Andy
--
Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of DOS,
and danced the skies on Linux silvered wings.
http://pfrostie.freeservers.com/cad-tastrafy/
//www.freelists.org/list/cad-linux
Other related posts: