Re: [Pan-users] Re: libstc++.so.6 missing

[Beso]

2008/8/27 Greg Lee <address@hidden>:
> On Wed, 27 Aug 2008 10:04:39 +0200, Beso wrote:
>
>> I use the amd64 system with multilib
>> enabled, since i use some firefox-bin, openoffice-bin, mplayer-bin and
>> mplayerplug-in compiled with ABI=x86.
>
> I also keep the 32 bit part of my system for the sake of Firefox
> and Openoffice binaries.  For one thing, there is no up to date
> 64 bit Java plugin for Firefox, so far as I know.  By the way,
> the Openoffice binary has its own private copy of libstdc++.
>

there's iced tea in the java overlay, which is the openjdk project and
what profanes call opensource java, which at this point is 98%
compatible with java 5 and almost 90% with java 6. in fact, fedora and
redhat will be going with this java version as default instead of the
official precompiled sun binaries. sun itselft thinks of removing the
development of the closed source and focus on addons for the
opensource version of java in the future. so if you install the java
overlay and icedtea + firefox + mplayer + mplayerplug-in you'll have a
64bit browser, but without a 64bit flash player (gnucash is still not
so good for the moment to be a real candidate).

>> never cleaned cruft files on the system. now what i've discovered thanks
>> to pan is that the libstdc++.so.6 was pointing to the 4.2.4 version
>> instead of the 4.3.1 while the inuse compiler was the 4.3.1. i don't
>> know when this problem occured ...
>
> I've noticed several times that running ldconfig revises soft links to
> point to the wrong dynamic libraries.  This is about the only time I've
> needed to remove old versions of libraries.  I don't know what is going
> on there.
>

this is the first time i've noticed this issue.



-- 
dott. ing. beso