Re: [tlug] A greeting, followed promptly by a question, of course.

[Botond Botyanszki <9915104t@example.com>]

On Mon, 02 Dec 2002 17:53:32 +0900
ccd <ccd@example.com> wrote:

> However, since my main gripe *is* with libs, I'm doing a "cp -ur 
> /opt/kde/lib* /usr/local/lib", and then again with /opt/gnome/lib... 
> Would it be a sound rationalization to believe that a symbolic link in 
> place of "/opt/<chosen WM>/lib" to "/usr/local/lib" is a simple 
> replacement for all these blasted libs?
Why don't you standardize on one libdir that you install your compiled libs into
(like /usr/local/lib) which is visible to the linker?
Or why don't you use the kde/gnome packages that come with your distribution
that puts the libs in a sane place? 
Alternatively you might want to put /opt/kde/lib and /opt/gnome/lib into your
ld.so.conf and rerun ldconfig.

> I can never keep track of where 
> they've gone to.
That's the problem. This is not the windows world where you just click install
and never know where those files end up. Even if you insist on compiling by
hand, configure has switches (eg. --prefix) to override the install path.
If you don't know where those libs will be copied before typing `make install`
then you should forget hand compilation. This is meant to be an advice, not
flaming.