From: hlu@luke.eecs.wsu.edu (HJ Lu) Subject: Re: Backup libraries (was Re: The dangers of playing with shared libraries) Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1993 14:20:31 GMT
In article <2033@dsbc.icl.co.uk> KID01 <mat@dsbc.icl.co.uk> writes:
>In article <STEVEV.93Apr14005153@miser.uoregon.edu> stevev@miser.uoregon.edu (Steve VanDevender) writes:
>>In article <1qfot4$tin@hal.gnu.ai.mit.edu>
>[..]
>
>Couldn't future version of linux binarys be compiled to first search for
>/lib/libc.so.4 and if that fails try /lib/libc.so.4.3, etc, etc. This
>shouldn't be a massive problem to setup and only if all of /lib was remove
>would the user be in trouble ! (in which case the binaries could search in
>/oops_i'v_lost_my_shared_libs/backup_here/libc.so.4)
>
>
The current one tries /usr/lib, /lib and "" in that order. But not
all binaries are linked with the new scheme.
H.J.