superfluous /usr/lib/*.so symbolic links

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Fri Sep 13 12:01:20 PDT 2002

On September 13, 2002 09:32 am, Jack Brown wrote:
>     I noticed in the CVS changelog that Gerard decided to remove one of the
> sets of .so symlinks from some of the packages. from what I can tell by
> browsing through the ncurses instructions, the wrong set of symlinks were
> deleted.  As far as I understand, the .so symlinks in /lib are the ones

I'm not suprised I messed it up again. Though, don't look at how Glibc does 
it, it doesn't do things entirely "correct" (as far as you can speak of 
correct and incorrect). It has its own way of doing things so we just ignore 
Glibc and let it be.

Having that said, it's a little bit late for me to redo the symlinks. I admit 
I didn't really think much what I was doing, just removing some, what seemed 
to be, cruft from /usr/lib

It doesn't cause any problems the way things are at the moment and I don't 
want to postpone the LFS-4 release because of it. We'll fix it up later.

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list