Re: ldconfig vs f8 ????
- From: Todd Denniston <Todd.Denniston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 15:08:15 -0400
Gene Heskett wrote, On 04/30/2008 02:54 PM:
Greetings;
Can anyone explain the reason why F8, by default, does not include /usr/local/lib in its working pathlist?
I just had to add another file naming it in /etc/ld.so.conf.d
I don't recall ever having to do that in any previous incarnations of fedora, it was always there.
Been that way since at least FC4.
I have a script that installed some stuff in /usr/local for fc4 and it had to
echo "/usr/local/lib" > /etc/ld.so.conf.d/usrlocal-i386.conf
for those programs to work.
we forget these things, when we install using .spec files that default to putting all programs in /usr/ vs /usr/local. :)
--
Todd Denniston
Crane Division, Naval Surface Warfare Center (NSWC Crane)
Harnessing the Power of Technology for the Warfighter
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
- References:
- ldconfig vs f8 ????
- From: Gene Heskett
- ldconfig vs f8 ????
- Prev by Date: Re: ldconfig vs f8 ????
- Next by Date: Re: ldconfig vs f8 ????
- Previous by thread: Re: ldconfig vs f8 ????
- Index(es):