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

[Graeme Gregory]

Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 15:56 +0200, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
>   
>> Phil Blundell wrote:
>>     
>>> On the other hand, if you find yourself obliged to spread the libraries
>>> across many directories, and/or if you plan to use hwcap-based
>>> searching, installing ldconfig might indeed be a net win.  If you're
>>> seeing 15 path lookups for each library load then it sounds like your
>>> system falls into this category.
>>>       
>> No, it is not my case. My image is just a plain angstrom-2008.1. These
>> 15 directories don't exist. With ld.so.cache I don't see these lookups.
>>
>> access("/etc/ld.so.preload", R_OK)      = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>> open("/var/run/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY)  = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>> open("/lib/tls/v5l/fast-mult/half/libm.so.6", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>> stat64("/lib/tls/v5l/fast-mult/half", 0xbedce3f0) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or directory)
>>     
>
> Right, so it appears that your distro is indeed using hwcap-based
> library searches; as I said above, this is one of the situations where
> ldconfig is a benefit.
>   
That would be an accidental Angstrom regression then! Ooops!

Graeme