GNU bug report logs - #30402
ldconfig confusion

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Reuben Thomas <rrt <at> sc3d.org>
To: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen <at> simple.dallas.tx.us>
Cc: 30402 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#30402: ldconfig confusion
Date: Fri, 9 Feb 2018 17:07:29 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On 9 February 2018 at 16:57, Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen <at> simple.dallas.tx.us>
wrote:

> This feels like a big dangerous change to me, especially since the current
> mode of operation has been in place for 20 years.  Should installing a
> package result in refreshing the configuration for the whole system,
> causing changes unrelated to the package?
>

​It should update the cache, yes, because otherwise the user has to do that
anyway, or the newly-installed library won't work.

I don't see any way with Linux ldconfig to do this in a more restrictive
way.​


> The installation prefix used is important since it might be into a
> directory already configured via /etc/ld.so.conf or it might be some
> directory that ldconfig does not know about.
>
> I see that Ubuntu provides special handling for /usr/local via
> /etc/ld.so.conf.d/libc.conf:
>
> % cat /etc/ld.so.conf
> include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*.conf
>
> % cat /etc/ld.so.conf.d/libc.conf
> # libc default configuration
> /usr/local/lib
>
> If one installs into a prefix that ldconfig does not already know about,
> then it seems that additional ldconfig configuration should be required in
> order for shared libraries installed there to work correctly.
>

​I was installing into /usr/local/lib. My system does indeed have this
(default) configuration.​

-- 
https://rrt.sc3d.org

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.