On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 14:46, Deane Barker wrote:
> "/usr/lib/libxml2.so: No such file or directory"

libxml2.so should be a symbolic link.  So, it probably links to a file
which does not exist.

> [root@plesk swish-e-2.4.0]# locate libxml2.so
> /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2
> /usr/lib/libxml2.so.2.5.10
> /usr/lib/libxml2.so

On Red Hat 7.2 (plus all updates from RHN):
$ ls -l /usr/lib/libxml2.so
lrwxrwxrwx    1 root     root           17 Dec  9 17:08
/usr/lib/libxml2.so -> libxml2.so.2.4.10

If you have a color terminal the output of ls should be highlighted in
red if the file is missing or green if it's not.

> Something to ponder:  is a new error message better than the same old
> error message?  I'm torn.  :-)

The real question is:  Where did libxml2 2.5.10 come from?

What is the output of this command:
  rpm -q libxml2 libxml2-devel
 =20
On a fully patched Red Hat 7.2 system it should say this:
$ rpm -q libxml2 libxml2-devel
libxml2-2.4.10-0.7x.2
libxml2-devel-2.4.10-0.7x.2

--=20
 David Norris
  http://www.webaugur.com/dave/
  ICQ - 412039



*********************************************************************
Due to deletion of content types excluded from this list by policy,
this multipart message was reduced to a single part, and from there
to a plain text message.
*********************************************************************