Please review this list of potentially missing .so symlinks.
Mike Hearn
mike at navi.cx
Sat Nov 27 21:27:33 UTC 2004
On Sat, 27 Nov 2004 15:28:48 -0500, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> ld-linux.so
This isn't necessary, as it's not linked to in the normal fashion. Instead
the full soname is encoded into the ELF headers at compile time.
> libc.so
libc is automatically linked by gcc.
> libgcc_s.so
This is also automatically linked in by gcc in certain circumstances.
> libgcj.so
I think the same is true of this.
What that means is that you don't need unversioned symlinks as the
toolchain picks the right version for you.
> libgmodule-1.2.so
Do you have the glib1.2 development package installed? If so then this
does indeed look like an oversight.
> lib-org-w3c-dom.so
> lib-org-xml-sax.so
> lib-gnu-java-awt-peer-gtk.so
I think these are loaded by the GCJ classloading mechanism and aren't
linked in the normal fashion.
.6.so
> libNoVersion.so
This is a part of glibc and is probably a magic lib you don't normally
need to -l link against.
> libobjc.so
Another implicitly linked runtime library, AFAIK.
> libpthread.so
> libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so
> libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so
> libstdc++.so
These are usually implicitly linked as well, aren't they?
No clue about the rest. Hope that helps (and that I'm accurate)
thanks -mike
More information about the fedora-devel-list
mailing list