Re: make

Aaron Ucko (UCKO@vax1.rockhurst.edu)
Sun, 16 Jun 1996 16:34:57 -0600 (CST)

>> Ever tried removing /lib/libc.so* with the hope of installing the new
>> ones? (** Please DON'T try it! None of your binaries will work after
>> that unless you reboot from different drive and fix the symlinks **)
>> Please don't think in terms of DOS .EXEs. Do a man on ld.so for
>> further details. The issue is deeper than just mere variables.
>>
>
>Hmm, I've done that, it was a very bad experance. You should be able to
>fix it with ldconfig tho, it's staticly linked (or should be, mine is),
>not that I'm going to try it to see ;)

What's really painful is cp'ing a new version of libc with the same
major number on top of the old one. (Don't ask...) If a cron job
starts up at the same time, WHAM! instant crash.

-- Aaron Ucko (ucko@vax1.rockhurst.edu; finger for PGP public key) | httyp!
"That's right," he said. "We're philosophers. We think, therefore we am."
-- Terry Pratchett, _Small Gods_ | Geek Code 3.1 [for explanation, finger
hayden@mankato.msus.edu]: GCS/M/S/C d- s: a18 C++(+++)>++++ UL++>++++ P++
L++>+++++ E- W(-) N++(+) o+ K- w--- O M@ V-(--) PS++(+++) PE- Y(+) PGP(+) t(+)
!5 X-- R(-) tv-@ b++(+++) DI+ !D-- G++(+++) e->+++++(*) h!>+ r-(--)>+++ y?