On Sunday 28 October 2007 08:09, Andras Mantia wrote:
> > On Saturday 27 October 2007 07:28, Andras Mantia wrote:
> >> On Saturday 27 October 2007, Michael Pyne wrote:
> >> > Weird.  Have you tried regenerating your ld.so.cache (which I believe
> >> > is done using ldconfig?)
> >>
> >> Yes, but ... I forgot to add /opt/kde4/lib64 to ld.so.conf. So this
> >> helps, but I still cannot understand why the libraries were found in
> >> some cases and not in some others. This looks like a bug somewhere.
> >
> > Ld can link with the full path to the library. Have you checked the
> > entries
> > with readelf?
>
> If you ask me about checking the RUNPATH/RPATH entries, yes, I did and
> they are not in the binaries/libraries. See one of my previous mails in
> the thread.
>
I didn't mean RPATH. The elf-binaries has a list of libraries, if these 
libraries are relative they use RPATH of LD_LIBRARY_PATH, but they can 
also be absolute with a full path. However it is only used in special 
cases, so it is unlikely.

Using "readelf -d" you will find a list of libraries like this:
0x00000001 (NEEDED)         Shared library: [libQtCore.so.4]
or like this:
0x00000001 (NEEDED)         Shared library: [/opt/qt-4/lib/libQtCore.so.4]

I doubt it is the case, it is just the only explanation I can think of, if you haven't set any RPATHs.

`Allan