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

Re: Acrobat 7.0 for linux is out



Thomas Adam wrote:
 --- "Roberto C. Sanchez" <roberto@familiasanchez.net> wrote:

The problem is that when I run Mozilla from the menu in wmaker, it
ignores all of those specifications.  I have /opt/bin added in both
/etc/login.defs and /etc/profile.  When I 'echo $PATH' either as root


Having it in /etc/profile is fine, although modifying that variable is
risque at best.  Do it on the per-user level.


or as a regular user I get /opt/bin in there.  However, if I have
linked acroread only into /opt/bin, the plugin fails in Mozilla and
Firefox.  If I relink it /usr/local/bin, then it works fine.  The


This is most likely a shared-object issue.  I bet if you added the path:

/opt/lib

(or whatever it is for you)

in the file /etc/ld.so.conf, and ran:

ldconfig -X

that it would then work from /opt


Except that I don't have a /opt/lib directory.  Even when I symlink to
/usr/local/bin, I don't link anything to /usr/local/lib.  When you run
acroread, it finds its way back to where the real file lives and then
finds the resources it needs in its home directory tree.

Of course, your other option is to forget /opt, and use stow as a means of
managing external apps from /usr/local/* ....


I use stow for a couple of apps, specifically qemu and dillo (both of
which I use from their respective CVS).  However, I only do it for those
since they have a sane directory structure (bin/ etc/ and lib/ for Dillo
and bin/ and share/ for qemu).  I don't think that Acrobat would be a
good candidate since it has bin/ Browser/ Reader/ Resource/ and I don't
particularly want to clutter up my /usr/local too much.

Besides, the point is that I have specified to the system to include
/opt/bin in the default path for *everyone* and it's not doing it or
some apps are ignoring it or have their own source for a PATH setting.

-Roberto

--
Roberto C. Sanchez
http://familiasanchez.net/~sanchezr

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: