Up Prev Next
From: Harry Bochner <harry dot bochner at genomecorp dot com>
Subject: Re: Client lib 11.1 and Digital Unix 4.0
Date: Oct 20 1997 8:13PM
Rick Perron wrote:
> Well your procedure works for me.
Good! I was afraid that another ten crazy things would go wrong
when some one else tried it ;-)
> You definitely get a much bigger
> binary (CTlib.so and DBlib.so), but that is not such a bad trade-off
> to have to worry about the LD_LIBRARY_PATH anymore.
Right. And the space isn't such a big issue, since we only need
one copy each of CTlib.so and DBlib.so. It's not like we're going
to link these libraries statically into each of a dozen different
> Also FYI: calling it DGUX is really confusing. Data General calls their
> unix DG/UX. I would stick with DU, or Digital Unix, or even OSF.
Aha. I probably saw DG/UX somewhere, and misinterpreted myself as
Digital Unix. I used to say OSF, but when DEC stopped using the term,
it didn't seem so useful anymore.