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

Re: netscape library dependencies?

Chris Ryan wrote:
> Hi,
> Further to this problem: I assumed that netscape is libc5 only, and

	There is a libc6 version of NS Communicator on ftp.netscape.com. 
As you go deeper in the path, select the 'unsupported' branch when
you come to it.  The libc6 based Communicator tarballs have
'glibc2' in their name (glibc2=libc6).

> redirected library loads to /usr/lib/libc5-compat (using
> LD_LIBRARY_PATH). This found the libc5 versions of most libraries, and

	I haven't found LD_LIBRARY_PATH necessary, at least it wasn't
necessary for wp8 (also libc5 based).  Just make sure the
libc5-compat paths are in /etc/ld.so.conf, and you've updated
things with 'ldconfig'.

> the libg++.so.27 and libstdc++.so.27 that are ONLY in the libc5
> directory. But this showed that a library libXpm.so.4 was not found.
> This appears to be only in the libc6 set.
> This is very confusing. It appears that netscape uses both libc5
> libraries (libg++.so.27 and libstdc++.so.27) as well as libc6 ones (eg.
> libXpm.so.4). But this is unlikely/impossible, as far as I can see. So,
> is there a libc5 version of libXpm.so.4 somewhere?
> Cheers, Chris.

	It is confusing, alas.  What you stumbled on is the fact that NS
Communicator (or are you using the limited 'navigator' version?)
is built against both libc6 and *X Window* libs.  The problem is
the X libs NS wants *themselves* have to be built under libc5.  So
the libs in usr/lib/libc5-compat/ are mainly X libs that are
needed for this reason.  The libc5 lib itself is in /lib/.  The
Xpm lib you're looking for is a libc5-built X Window lib.  So to
get NS working, you need 'libc5', 'xlib6', and 'xpm4.7' from the
'oldlibs' section as displayed in dselect.
	At the moment I can't remember if the C++ libs are important.  I
*think* the old libc5 versions of NS can use the current ones.  On
the other hand I have an older version of libstdc++ installed
(oldlibs section), and I don't know why.

Ed C.

Reply to: