libiovmall.so

[bblochl2-2]

There was a permanent problem with libiovmall.so starting about 2008.
With teh Makefile on any usual linux machine you get a messy link:
/usr/local/lib/libiovmall.so (libc6) => /usr/local/lib//usr/local/lib/libiovmall.so
Say ther is one /usr/local/lib/ to much and the entry makes a lot of troubl.
Just by chance (while dealing with problems with ldconfig as a follow up of that libiovmall.so) I found a message http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=2307:
"ldconfig will not link /usr/local/lib"
AFAIK was/is the maker of the Makefile strongly connected to BSD? Just as a theory: Could it happen that that double entry of "/usr/local/lib/" in the link cited above has its reason in that BSD-problem? A Makefile good for BSD to overcome that problem, a severe problem for all other linuxes? (I think it is still a problem.)

Regards bb

[Jeremy Tregunna-2]

On 2009-10-13, at 3:08 PM, bblochl2@... wrote:

> There was a permanent problem with libiovmall.so starting about 2008.
> With teh Makefile on any usual linux machine you get a messy link:
> /usr/local/lib/libiovmall.so (libc6) => /usr/local/lib//usr/local/
> lib/libiovmall.so
> Say ther is one /usr/local/lib/ to much and the entry makes a lot of  
> troubl.
> Just by chance (while dealing with problems with ldconfig as a  
> follow up of that libiovmall.so) I found a message http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=2307:
> "ldconfig will not link /usr/local/lib"
> AFAIK was/is the maker of the Makefile strongly connected to BSD?  
> Just as a theory: Could it happen that that double entry of "/usr/
> local/lib/" in the link cited above has its reason in that BSD-
> problem? A Makefile good for BSD to overcome that problem, a severe  
> problem for all other linuxes? (I think it is still a problem.)

Most of us developers use a BSD derived platform yes -- two of the  
major contributors, Steve Dekorte and myself develop on Mac OS X. That  
said however, it is actually a Linux problem. GNU ld is what's called  
a dumb linker. You need to point it at a dir you want to be able to  
find libraries in *AND* if you add files there, you are not guaranteed  
to have it pick up those new libs unless you rebuild the cache.

This is most certainly a GNU ld problem, not a Linux or a BSD problem.  
Any platform that uses GNU ld will also exhibit this behaviour. Sorry,  
but that's the way it is.

> Regards bb

Regards,

Jeremy Tregunna
jeremy.tregunna@...

[Steve Dekorte]

On 2009-10-13, at 12:08 PM, bblochl2@... wrote:

> There was a permanent problem with libiovmall.so starting about 2008.
> With teh Makefile on any usual linux machine you get a messy link:
> /usr/local/lib/libiovmall.so (libc6) => /usr/local/lib//usr/local/
> lib/libiovmall.so
> Say ther is one /usr/local/lib/ to much and the entry makes a lot of  
> troubl.
> Just by chance (while dealing with problems with ldconfig as a  
> follow up of that libiovmall.so) I found a message http://forums.freebsd.org/showthread.php?t=2307:
> "ldconfig will not link /usr/local/lib"
> AFAIK was/is the maker of the Makefile strongly connected to BSD?  
> Just as a theory: Could it happen that that double entry of "/usr/
> local/lib/" in the link cited above has its reason in that BSD-
> problem? A Makefile good for BSD to overcome that problem, a severe  
> problem for all other linuxes? (I think it is still a problem.)

Hey bb,

Could you post a patch for the fix?

Thanks,
Steve