Bug#154169: mklibs: bug re-introduces (symlinks)
On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 10:21, Tollef Fog Heen wrote:
> * Philip Blundell
>
> | On Thu, 2002-07-25 at 09:24, Thomas Poindessous wrote:
> | > On Wed, 2002-07-24 at 20:28, Matt Kraai wrote:
> | > > On Wed, Jul 24, 2002 at 07:42:24PM +0200, Thomas Poindessous wrote:
> | > > > Hi, I tried to rebuild d-i and I looked that symlinks of /lib/ld-2.2.5 to
> | > > > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (and others) was missing.
> | > >
> | > > Please remind me: why do we need to preserve these symlinks?
> | >
> | > If there is no symlinks, ash and busybox can't work (from ash-udeb and
> | > busybox-udeb)
> |
> | Why not just install the real libraries under the sonames?
>
> Because then you can't see which version of the library it really is?
Is it really useful to be able to do that for the installation disks?
Without information on what Debian patches have been applied, knowing
the base version number of the library doesn't seem to buy much. If
it's important to be able to go back and figure out what libraries are
on an old build of boot-floppies after the fact, we ought to ship some
kind of explicit file that details what package versions were used in
the build.
p.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: