Re: '/lib/ld-linux.so.2 is not a symlink'
On Wed 10 Feb 1999, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
> On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Paul Slootman wrote:
> > ld-linux.so.2 is usually a symlink to ld-2.0.7.so, isn't it?
> > Chris, what's going on? This is from libc6.1 126.96.36.19981211-2. There's
> > also something there that worries me:
> Hmmm..I'll look into this. I just saw it also (how I missed it before
> I'll never know). I'm out sick today, so I should have a bit more time to
Hmmm, I was afraid that you were going to say that you wouldn't be able
to check this out. Should I wish you a speedy recovery? Not as far as
debian/alpha is concerned, I guess :-)
> check this out. FYI, I built the package "as was", so it could be a
> packaging problem. As I said, I'll check it out...
I just checked with dpkg --contents what's in the i386 package, and it's
a symlink there:
-rwxr-xr-x root/root 45017 1999-02-04 15:34 lib/ld-2.0.7.so
lrwxrwxrwx root/root 0 1999-02-04 15:35 lib/ld-linux.so.2 -> ld-2.0.7.so
BTW, good work on the glibc 2.1 front!
home: email@example.com | work: firstname.lastname@example.org | debian: email@example.com
http://www.wurtel.demon.nl | Murphy Software, Enschede, the Netherlands