On Fri, Jul 09, 2010 at 07:55:43PM +0200, Antonin Kral wrote: > Hi Kurt, > > thank you for the report. Could you please give my some pointers to > learn more details, how this is expected to be harmful? > > I have seen other report of yours at > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=588554 > > but I was unable to find something solid about the issue. It looks like, > that Debian policy permits lib as well as lib64. On the other hand, I > have found some problem with dpkg and directory handling in lib. There > is the generic rule, that all libs in debian are in lib, but it seems to > me that > > bo...@bobek-a0:~$ ls /usr/lib64 | wc -l > 3540
Note that /usr/lib64 is a symlink to /usr/lib/. dpkg might decide that /usr/lib64 is an empty dir and decide to remove the symlink, while that symlink is needed to find the dynamic linker. Kurt -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected]
