Re: [ds_mpls] Modification installation problem

[LLeweLLyn Reese <llewelly at lifesupport dot shutdown dot com>]

I'm bringing this back to the gcc-help list; I had intended to set my
    reply-to to gcc-help, but I forgot.

Marc-André Breton <marc dot andre dot breton at lagrit dot etsmtl dot ca> writes:

> On Wednesday 05 March 2003 07:06 pm, you wrote:
> > Marc-André Breton <marc dot andre dot breton at lagrit dot etsmtl dot ca> writes:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > Ok, now I recompiled with my gcc 2.96 version and I make sure that in
> > > rsvp_netio.c, the variable declaration (int len;) is at the beginning of
> > > the rsvp_pkt_process_1 function. I don't have error except some usual
> > > warnings and all my executables are created (I really don't know why it
> > > didn't work the first time that I do that !! ). I am also able to
> > > configure my interfaces with "./ds_config". But when I want to start the
> > > daemon I have a weird error like
> > >
> > > [root at lagrit12 rsvpd]# ./rsvpd -D
> > > ./rsvpd: error while loading shared libraries: libstdc++.so.5: cannot
> > > open shared object file: No such file or directory
> >
> > Are you *sure* you are trying to run the version compiled with 2.96?
> >     libstdc++.so.5 is the gcc 3.2.x shared lib for standard C++. 2.96
> >     uses libstdc++.so.3 .
> 
> [root at lagrit12 root]# gcc -v
> Reading specs from /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i386-redhat-linux/2.96/specs
> gcc version 2.96 20000731 (Red Hat Linux 7.3 2.96-110)

Then I have no explanation for why your rsvpd executable wishes to
    link with libstdc++.so.5 . Sorry.

> 
> >
> > > What does it mean? "libstdc++" and "libstdc++-devel" packages are both
> > > installed on my machine. What can I do for it?
> >
> > For gcc 2.96 or for gcc 3.2.x ?
> 
> When I look with Kpackage I see version 2.96-110 for both packages.

Good.

> But I have always version 3.2.2 installed in my machine in case that I would 
> like to switch to an upper version. May be sould I delete this folder?
[snip]

I don't think so. If 3.2.2 and 2.96 were installed with different prefixes
    (likely; most linux distros use --prefix=/usr for the gcc they
    supply, and the default when building gcc from source is
    --prefix=/usr/local), I don't know of any reason you should delete
    either of them.

If you installed 3.2.2 and 2.96 with the same prefix, you have a
    problem (that is, niehter compiler is likely to work correctly
    when this is the case), but deleting folders is not the solution. 

Certainly you should *not* delete /usr ; that will cause your system to
    effectively cease functioning. You would then have to do some kind
    of recovery which is at best an error-prone nuisance.

Don't delete /usr/local either; who knows what else might be installed
    there.