Hi All,
I question the purpose of leaving broken symbolic links when
upgrading the libraries. For instance libreadline2 leaves
the following broken links reported by ldconfig:
Setting up libreadline2 (2.1-8) ...
ldconfig: warning: can't open /usr/lib/libpthread.so (No such file or
directory), skipping
ldconfig: warning: can't open /usr/lib/libreadline.so (No such file or
directory), skipping
ldconfig: warning: can't open /usr/lib/libhistory.so (No such file or
directory), skipping
ldconfig: warning: can't open /usr/lib/libreadline.so.2.0 (No such file
or
directory), skipping
ldconfig: warning: can't open /lib/libreadline.so.2.0 (No such file or
directory), skipping
Now I realize that the argument is that these belong to the development
packages. But my concern is for the ones that are not familiar with
symbolic links and the such. Also Debian is built with the premise of
upgradability.
I feel that the policy of breaking the symbolic links of the system
without removing them in not a good idea. And as more of the libraries
are upgraded the error messages compound. Could it be wise to run from
the post install scripts symlinks -d to remove the dangling links
created
from the upgrade? This could be run on both the /lib and /usr/lib
directories. After symlinks -d is finished rinning then run ldconfig
which will now not report the errors and warnings.
By doing this, upgrading a system for the new guy will appear to be a
smother operation. Possibly, there could be a policy statement saying
that no package will leave any dangling links. This will also make
upgrading more professional.
--
0 0 L & R Associates
" Home Page: http://www.netaxs.com/~ldc/
_______ooO ~ Ooo_______________________________________________
LeRoy D. Cressy /\_/\ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Computer Consulting ( o.o ) Phone (215) 535-4037
> ^ < Fax (215) 535-4285
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
