So would my origional solution (recompiling every piece of software that needs libcom_err.so.3) be the only "stable" solution?
On Sun, 30 Nov 2003 22:44:20 -0800, Gordon Messmer <yinyang@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Matt Temple wrote:
Just to note -- it came up before, that frequently this problem can be solved by:
ln -sf libcom_err.so.3 libcom_err.so.2
This "solution" will only work as long as you never use the functions of that library. If that library is ever accessed, your application will almost certainly crash. Don't do this. Ever. At the very least, never rely on it to work. Library versions change when interfaces change in incompatible ways.
There was an issue here about whether or not anything should be using that library. The issue, as I understood it, was that there were
some fundamental issues with libcom_err.so.3 altogether.
Further, I believe that this is only an issue if there are functions in
the "real" libcom_err.so.3 that aren't in libcom_err.so.2 that are called by Pine and Pico.
I think that the question of the whether this library should be around needs to be resolved. And of course, building the software yourself is a more robust solution.
That being said, I've been using Pine/Pico ever since I got the Fedora release employing the link as described above with not-a-crash or
other problem.
A recompiled version is clearly a better choice.
mht
-- ============================================================= Matthew Temple Tel: 617/632-2597 Director, Research Computing Fax: 617/582-7820 Dana-Farber Cancer Institute mht@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 44 Binney Street, ML105 http://research.dfci.harvard.edu Boston, MA 02115 Choice is the Choice!
