On 04/11/2012 09:23 AM, Steve Davidson wrote: On the other hand... Adding a soft link (and documenting it - don't ALL system managers document their system changes???) may be preferred to changing the makefile because once you change the makefile you OWN its maintenance. Different strokes for different folks. In my case, I OWNED its maintenance for the five minutes it remained in existence, before I deleted the source tree after running "make install". Fixing where poorly-written Makefiles look for libraries is UNIX Administration 101. And why symlinking stuff into non-distribution-standard locations to compensate for one poorly-written Makefile is a bad idea is 102. ;) -Dave -- Dave McGuire, AK4HZ New Kensington, PA