| 1 |
Mateusz Neumann said: |
| 2 |
> W li¶cie z czw, 18-03-2004, godz. 12:33, Anthony Metcalf pisze: |
| 3 |
>> > I think that it's not necessary if those applications were compiled |
| 4 |
>> > with dynamic linking. So most applications don't need to be |
| 5 |
>> > recompiled. |
| 6 |
>> > |
| 7 |
>> I would have thought this was the case. If it is not, could someone |
| 8 |
>> explain why? |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> > Btw. how to determine which applications are compiled against openssl? |
| 11 |
>> > And which applications are linked statically and which dynamically |
| 12 |
>> > with openssl? |
| 13 |
>> > |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> revdep-rebuild --soname libssl.so.0.9.6 |
| 16 |
> revdep-rebuild --soname libssl.so.0.9.7 |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> .m |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
...and actually, this is what I did last night, as after emerging 0.9.7 it |
| 21 |
told me as much. The problem came when it hit Abiword; it told me that it |
| 22 |
was 'blocking' and that I should manually fix that, and then rerun the |
| 23 |
revdep-rebuild. Since the Abiword that was blocking was pre2, I thought |
| 24 |
I'd just unmerge it since I now only use Abiword-2. I issued the 'emerge |
| 25 |
unmerge abiword', and that's when I noticed emerge was borked due to the |
| 26 |
openssl so not being in line. This is where I got stuck and hit this |
| 27 |
list. So, why did emerging 0.9.7 take away the 0.9.6 so? I *think* |
| 28 |
that's what happened at least. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
P |
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
http://lefttochance.com/ |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-security@g.o mailing list |
Archives