Re: gEDA-user: 20050329 install problem

[Marvin Dickens <marvindickens@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Sunday 03 April 2005 18:15, Gene Heskett wrote:

> >The way it's supposed to work is that the list of directories on a
> > system that are to be searched are supposed to be stored in the
> > file /etc/ld.so.conf.  A lot of Red Hat derived distributions  do
> > not include /usr/local/lib in the file /etc/ld.so.conf. Is this a
> > bug or intentional? Regardless, it's broken. You can "fix" this by
> > adding /usr/local/lib to /etc/ld.so.conf.
>
> Which I did, years ago.  But, I've been told that /lib, /usr/lib,
> and /usr/local/lib are builtin defaults.  But, I've not seen any
> evidence that the search is truely exhaustive in looking at the
> ld.so.cache here.

Neither have I. Perhaps the solution to this conundrum is something
along the line of a program that is independent of distributions
and/or applications. It's purpose would be to *thoroughly* search
the *entire* system and create a database of what is installed and 
where it is residing on the system. Then ./configure would read
the database and know what you have and what you don't have.

Currently, regardless of what anybody says, the distro houses
tweak the system to be able to call it "Their version of Linux" and pretty 
much hoark some obscure piece of code residing on the system that 
invariably affects dependencies for some programs (I suppose I should be 
saying the ability to properly determine dependencies...). I don't think this 
is ever going to stop.

If the program that determined dependencies was not part of the distribution
and further, the methodology used to determine dependencies was distro 
independent, distributors couldn't/wouldn't have the opportunity to screw it 
up.

Regards

Marvin