From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Apr 10 21:44:48 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 100CC1065673 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:44:48 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scain@exgenesis.com) Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.197]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCACD8FC15 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:44:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from scain@exgenesis.com) Received: from [192.168.13.10] (adsl-70-250-185-25.dsl.rcsntx.swbell.net [70.250.185.25]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MKp8S-1Jk4ZW0AcL-0005q7; Thu, 10 Apr 2008 17:44:45 -0400 From: Shelby Cain To: Mel In-Reply-To: <200804102309.37024.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> References: <1207855812.11735.39.camel@localhost> <200804102309.37024.fbsd.questions@rachie.is-a-geek.net> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-blJ1mChlhSBQVCxvDgpQ" Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 16:44:39 -0500 Message-Id: <1207863879.11735.85.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.12.1 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/WmUfPjxcYkeki1rq3rhpxgpEP2MO6zCJoPex iggLBC+4+nRumCLwWcooFI1JV6sdhT3kPDkE/O+7VeD/295kwE abcy0jtFL4HMHVnZ9xybB8KPmIXtKxD Cc: Edward Capriolo , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Invoking ldconfig without arguments wipes all hints and makes me very sad X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 21:44:48 -0000 --=-blJ1mChlhSBQVCxvDgpQ Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 2008-04-10 at 23:09 +0200, Mel wrote: >=20 > First of all, running ldconfig without arguments does nothing bad. Runnin= g=20 > ldconfig without flags and with arguments does. >=20 > Secondly, what is the command: > ldconfig /usr/lib >=20 > supposed to do, according to newbie friendly logic? > Because it should be possible to "just have the linker create hints for o= ne=20 > directory". >=20 Your example seems perfectly reasonable should one wish to create hints for only one directory. However, in my particular case it seems that my blunder of running ldconfig -v (and not ldconfig by itself as I had assumed - my bad) is sufficient to render it impossible to log in as my regular user account since I had set my default login shell to bash. That, in conjunction with root being disallowed by default in sshd effectively locked me out of my machine once I closed my only open ssh session. Modifying my original suggestion slightly, is there any reason why it would be a bad thing for ldconfig to assume -r when either -v with no other arguments (or no arguments at all) is passed to ldconfig or is there some specific reason for the current behavior? Regards, Shelby Cain --=-blJ1mChlhSBQVCxvDgpQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBH/opHFioAnfS4MHQRAhcnAJ44HmOyRlzrT9mVDdV7aaEPoOCFgACfWrzI LjgIajFvu9tlg8nTehuPkAs= =ncjr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-blJ1mChlhSBQVCxvDgpQ--