ginal Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Leif Neland
> Sent: Wednesday, November 29, 2000 4:23 PM
> To: Kris Kennaway
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: libc.so.4 not found
>
>
>
>
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, Kris Kennaway wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 10:28:53PM +0100, Leif Neland wrote:
> > Could this be the reason why Avp (virusscanner) for FreeBSD 4X just dumps
> > core on Fbsd current?
> > It works on a Fbsd stable.
>
> Could be malloc.conf defaults. i.e. a bug in avp t
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 10:28:53PM +0100, Leif Neland wrote:
> Could this be the reason why Avp (virusscanner) for FreeBSD 4X just dumps
> core on Fbsd current?
> It works on a Fbsd stable.
Could be malloc.conf defaults. i.e. a bug in avp triggered by the
debugging /etc/malloc.conf settings in -c
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:34:49PM -0800, Derek Schene' wrote:
> I tried this-
>
> > I'd suggest just symlinking libc.so.4 to libc.so.5, nothing terrible
> > should happen.
Since nothing has changed in the -CURRENT libc yet, this will work.
BTW, you'd want to do the same for libc_r.so.4.
Thanks for everyone's input, I feel I'm getting closer and see where my previous
thinking had gone wrong.
I tried this-
> I'd suggest just symlinking libc.so.4 to libc.so.5, nothing terrible
> should happen.
and now when booting get-
Local package initialization:fopen: No such file or
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:07:05PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> I am not sure, if anybody care for this fix, but I just copied libc.so.5
> to libc.so.4 when kde was complaining about not finding it. I am not sure
> if this should work, but it does work just fine...
It will work for a while.
I am not sure, if anybody care for this fix, but I just copied libc.so.5
to libc.so.4 when kde was complaining about not finding it. I am not sure
if this should work, but it does work just fine...
JAn
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:44:34PM -0600, Bill Fu
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:44:34PM -0600, Bill Fumerola wrote:
> > Huh? Why the worst of both worlds??
>
> Incompatible changes AND no way to differentiate between the two. (plus we
> don't even know what changed it, so we have no way of telling people "your
> libc before X won't work with binar
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 10:28:53PM +0100, Leif Neland wrote:
> Could this be the reason why Avp (virusscanner) for FreeBSD 4X just dumps
> core on Fbsd current?
> It works on a Fbsd stable.
no, if it was missing the proper version of libc, the linker would let you
know about it. coredump is compl
Could this be the reason why Avp (virusscanner) for FreeBSD 4X just dumps
core on Fbsd current?
It works on a Fbsd stable.
Leif
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 03:08:34AM -0800, David O'Brien wrote:
> In this case it doesn't matter -- "a fresh hard drive" and "local
> package" implies that the -current packages on ftp.freebsd.org haven't
> been built since the bump and are thus slightly out dated.
Plus all 3rd party software tha
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 02:44:08AM -0600, Bill Fumerola wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:18:43AM -0800, Derek Schene' wrote:
> > On a fresh hard drive I installed 5.0 20001123 Current and got the
> > following after installation:
> >
> > Local package initialization:/usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: S
On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:18:43AM -0800, Derek Schene' wrote:
> On a fresh hard drive I installed 5.0 20001123 Current and got the
> following after installation:
>
> Local package initialization:/usr/libexec/ld-elf.so.1: Shared object
> "libc.so.4" not found
we bumped the libc version to 5, bu
13 matches
Mail list logo
