[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libc6-i386 versus ia32-libs

Hi Goswin,

Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Harald Dunkel <harald.dunkel@t-online.de> writes:
>>But if I run 'ldconfig -v' as suggested the /emul library directories
>>are ignored. See below. The man page for ldconfig doesn't mention
>>/lib/ldconfig either. Is your version in experimental?
> No, the normal sid version. What version of libc6 do you have? Could
> it be that the libc6 and libc6-i386 have different versions? The
> libc6-i386 shoul depend on a new enough libc6 package for ldconfig to
> work. But I never checked that and don't have access to my sid system
> currently.

Of course there are no pending upgrades. Esp. for libc6\*:

% dpkg -l libc6\*
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name           Version        Description
ii  libc6          2.3.6-3        GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone
un  libc6-bin      <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6-dbg      <none>         (no description available)
ii  libc6-dev      2.3.6-3        GNU C Library: Development Libraries and Hea
un  libc6-dev-i386 <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6-doc      <none>         (no description available)
ii  libc6-i386     2.3.6-3        GNU C Library: 32bit shared libraries for AM
un  libc6-pic      <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6-prof     <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6.1        <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6.1-dev    <none>         (no description available)
un  libc6.1-pic    <none>         (no description available)

As mentioned before, the /lib/ldconfig feature is not documented
at all. Whch version of libc6* has been used for testing?

>>There is yet another concern: ld.so.conf also contained a search
>>sequence for library directories (AFAIK). How is this supposed to
>>work with the new directory containg symbolic links?
> Hmm. I don't think there is a concept for the search order of those
> links yet. The directory is ment only for system library dirs so there
> should be no need for ordering them I think. User dirs should still be
> in ld.so.conf

There could be a conflict even for system libraries, e.g. between
a stripped-down small library in /lib used at boot time, and the
full multi-lingual version in /usr/lib, for example.



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: