Re: Running ldconfig

[Michael Abbott <michael at araneidae dot co dot uk>]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2008, Dimitry Andric wrote:
> On 2008-11-03 11:02, Michael Abbott wrote:
> > I'm tempted to try building a dynamically linked ldconfig...
> 
> Please think about the reason it's statically linked: if your 
> ld.so.cache is screwed up, or any other dynamic library problems exist, 
> you might not be able to repair it. :)

Well, that's an interesting point ... but when things are so bad that 
dynamically linked programs won't load, surely we're dead in the water 
anyway?  I can imagine perhaps "oops, I've just screwed up, better run 
ldconfig to put things back together, luck I've still got a shell", but 
otherwise, surely when things are so bad I can't even start the shell -- 
let alone boot!

On the whole, when the system is in such a state, I'd rather erase it and 
start again (we're talking embedded here, after all).

> If you are 100% sure that your dynamic library symlinks and ld.so.cache
> files are okay, you don't need ldconfig at all.

The symlinks baffle me so far (at present I'm just carefully copying 
exactly what I need from $ARCH/sys-root/lib and $ARCH/sys-root/usr/lib, 
including symlinks), but as noted in my first mail, the cache seems to be 
optional ... but maybe helpful.  Maybe if I dig deep enough I can figure 
out how to rebuild the cache by hand, but that does seem rather pointless 
-- think a dynamically linked ldconfig is a more interesting option.

The case for having an ldconfig present persistently is, I think, when 
installing new applications.

--
For unsubscribe information see http://sourceware.org/lists.html#faq