[oe] [oe-commits] Stanislav Brabec : glibc: Install ld.so.conf, so ldconfig does not complain .

[Stanislav Brabec]

Phil Blundell wrote:
   
> > I have the feeling this is the reversal of a previous decision to remove 
> > ld.so.conf from rootfs.
> > 
> > Also its a core change and I don't see any Acked-By:
> 
> Agreed, that change seems wrong.  If a particular DISTRO wants to ship
> ld.so.conf in glibc then that's fine,

I just reverted this change. Sorry for that. It looked just like a typo:
ld.so.conf was copied to source tree and the patch suppressing the
warning on missing ld.so.conf (ldconfig.patch) was commented out...

If missing ld.so.conf is intended, ld.co.sonf could be removed from
recipes and ldconfig.patch (or at least its last chunk) should be
applied.

> but it shouldn't be standard and
> definitely not without a USE_LDCONFIG conditional.

It was inside USE_LDCONFIG, if ldconfig is installed.

By the way, what is the benefit of not using ldconfig? Strace shows 15
extra failing library lookups for each library.

-- 
Stanislav Brabec
http://www.penguin.cz/~utx/zaurus