[lfs-dev] Re: superfluous /usr/lib/*.so symbolic links

Silas Reign srain at frii.com
Fri Sep 13 13:22:11 PDT 2002

On Fri, 13 Sep 2002, Gerard Beekmans wrote:

> 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.

What issues may it cause in the future?  Will it impact certain packages that
may be installed later?  Would it be wise to re-create the symlinks and just
deal with the extra files?


Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message

More information about the lfs-dev mailing list