Error loading bin/libsmb.so?

Elrond Elrond at Wunder-Nett.org
Thu Jan 20 18:16:49 GMT 2000


On Fri, Jan 21, 2000 at 05:04:28AM +1100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Jan 2000, John Rooke wrote:
> 
> > Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> > > is it normal for people to have LD_LIBRARY_PATH?
> > 
> > No - that was just me in my ignorance trying to get it to work (and in the
> > process confusing Samba with something else) - sorry for the confusion.
> > 
> > I have it working now - I copied the two *.so files to /bin and all is OK.
> 
> v. cool.  *sigh* it's all just changed, again, with elrond's libtool patch
> :-) :-)
> 
> elrond, you want to take centre stage and explain how this works?  do we
> need LD_LIBRARY_PATH?

Yeah, I will explain a bit down under.

> how can i run it _without_ doing "make install" which i almost never do?
So it works for you _after_ "make install" ?
(Okay... I can reproduce the problem in the build-tree now
here too... I'll check... [*hoping, not _again_ a bug in
libtool*])


Okay:

If I got all right, nobody should realy notice, that we
ever switched to shared libraries.
The binaries have compiled in, where the libraries are. You
realy should be able to just do something like
	/usr/local/samba/bin/smbd -D
in your start-up-scripts.

No need for LD_LIBRAR_PATH, no need to be in the right
directory, no need to add /usr/local/samba/lib to your
shared-libraries-loaders configuration.

libtool is just a big hack, that was filled with a lot of
knowledge about shared libraries on various systems.

So it should now build and properly use shared library
system on nearly any system, that supports them.

If you don't want shared libraries (for what ever reason),
you can do "./configure --disable-shared".

One _realy_ good reason for doing this is, if you want to
mix versions from TNG. (like samrd from today, rpcclient
from tomorrow)

Hope, that helps.


    Elrond



More information about the samba-ntdom mailing list