Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!mordor!joyce!ames!ucsd!rutgers!att!mtuxo!rolls!attdso!tim
From: tim@attdso.ATT.COM (Tim J Ihde)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: RFS Questions
Keywords: RFS
Message-ID: <579@attdso.ATT.COM>
Date: 12 Sep 88 14:31:22 GMT
References: <793@mccc.UUCP> <577@attdso.ATT.COM> <809@mccc.UUCP>
Reply-To: tim@attdso.UUCP (Tim J Ihde)
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T DSO-HQ, Morristown, NJ
Lines: 22

In article <809@mccc.UUCP> pjh@mccc.UUCP (Pete Holsberg) writes:
>I made a script with cc and a bunch of -Y options, but if mounting
>server's /usr/include on client's /usr/include and mounting server's
>/lib on client's /lib will do the trick, I will go that route as it
>seems a cleaner approach.  You're saying that all header files and all
>libraries will be accessible by cc that way?

Yes - just be careful when installing new packages that put stuff in
/lib or /usr/lib (such as informix).  Make sure you know where they are
going (esp. if you mount the rfs'ed filesystem read only).  As long as
you can look at /lib or /usr/include, and see the files there that are
supposed to be there, then the compiler will find them too.  The fact
that they are RFS'ed should be invisible.

>Many thanks.

You're welcome.

	tim
-- 
Tim J Ihde					att!attdso!tim
(201) 898-6687					tim@attdso.att.com
This disclaimer intentionally left blank.  	attmail!tihde