Andy Green said: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Tuesday 11 November 2003 12:32, John Hodrien wrote: > >> Once you've got an RPM database that only loosely reflects what you've >> actually got installed you'll get into this situation more and more. > > Wow, I guess you never had to touch a .tar.gz, or a binary-only thing like > flash or nVidia... or pull something from CVS and cook it to get a broken > thing working... Welcome To The Real World, Neo, where not everything you > need is packaged. > >> Or maybe people just enjoy living in a world of pain? > > I'm happy when I can get on with my work with a minimum of detours into > mysteries. If a later RPM with a real .so.3 wants to crap on my symlink > I'm > happy. > The more likely to happen problem is software relying on something provided by libcom_err.so.3 that isn't provided by libcom_err.so.2. So you know, six months down the road, when you forgot you made that symlink and a newly installed program just keeps bombing out. Then you start wasting your time and developer's time trying to troubleshoot it. If you search bugzilla, you'll find libcom_err.so.3 is gone. If you have a binary RPM that requires it the best coarse of action is to rebuild that RPM so it matches your installed libraries. -- William Hooper -- William Hooper
