On Thursday, November 12 1998, at 22:22:56, Loic Prylli wrote:
:
: Hello,
:
: Looks like when you build ldso from source on Alpha (and probably on
: powerpc), it now builds just the ldconfig binary, so exactly what was
: provided by the ldconfig package. So I guess now the ldconfig package
: can
On Thu, Nov 12, 1998 at 10:22:56PM +0100, Loic Prylli wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Looks like when you build ldso from source on Alpha (and probably on
> powerpc), it now builds just the ldconfig binary, so exactly what was
> provided by the ldconfig package. So I guess now the ldconfig package
> can no
On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Loic Prylli wrote:
> I guess it is better to do it now, no package was depending on
> ldconfig when I removed it on my system (just had to just
> --force-remove-essential), this is logical as it was in base.
> Anyway ldso actually "Provides:" ldconfig.
That's good. I do rec
Christopher C Chimelis writes:
>
> On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Loic Prylli wrote:
>
> > Looks like when you build ldso from source on Alpha (and probably on
> > powerpc), it now builds just the ldconfig binary, so exactly what was
> > provided by the ldconfig package. So I guess now the ldconfig
On Thu, 12 Nov 1998, Loic Prylli wrote:
> Looks like when you build ldso from source on Alpha (and probably on
> powerpc), it now builds just the ldconfig binary, so exactly what was
> provided by the ldconfig package. So I guess now the ldconfig package
> can now be obsoleted (the ld.so package
Hello,
Looks like when you build ldso from source on Alpha (and probably on
powerpc), it now builds just the ldconfig binary, so exactly what was
provided by the ldconfig package. So I guess now the ldconfig package
can now be obsoleted (the ld.so package is more current).
If nobody objects soon
6 matches
Mail list logo
