> If you RPATH this, and allow ld.so.conf, which libutil.so.4 is
> ld.elf_so supposed to pick?  Even if you allow RPATH _with_
> ld.so.conf, you are screwed here!

Can you explain how ld.so.conf is any different from LD_LIBRARY_PATH
in this regard?  You aren't "screwed," you just have to define which
takes precedence.

> Plenty of other systems can deal with the lack of [ld.so.conf],

Like Solaris and IRIX?  They don't have it, and it sucks.  If I
maintain a site and I want to distribut shared libraries in a
directory not ordinarily in the library search path, I'm fairly
screwed.  Relying on RPATH is one holy hell of a portability problem
("just add -R"?  Try that with IRIX cc some day) and relying on users'
LD_LIBRARY_PATH settings is a recipe for a support nightmare.

I use ld.so.conf on NetBSD/i386 machines.  It's helpful.  I'd be
rather irritated if it went away.