[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: tk vs tkstep

On Mon, Jan 04, 1999 at 10:32:33AM +0100, Ulf Jaenicke-Roessler wrote:
>  update-alternatives complains (update-alternatives --auto wish) about a
>  problem with slave links for wish8.0 and its man page wish8.0.1. This is
>  because tkstep8.0 installs these slave links, although there are binaries
>  of the same name in the same location from tk8.0. tkstep4.2 doesn't do
>  something like that for tk4.2.

How does it complain.

>  If the behaviour of tkstep8.0 is correct, it should conflict with and
>  replace tk8.0.

I don't know of any reason why tkstep8.0 should conflict with tk8.0.

>  Furthermore, for tkstep (either 4.2 and 8.0) there's an additional entry
>  /usr/lib/tkstep in ld.so.conf. However, this way the library libtk in
>  this tkstep directory is always found before the libtk library in
>  /usr/lib, and therefore tkstep libraries hide tk libraries. I think, there

If you don't want this behavior, you should remove /usr/lib/tkstep
from /etc/ld.so.conf.

>  should be alternatives used for libtk too (not only for wish), but I'm not
>  sure if this is "allowed" for libraries by policy (it's not forbidden
>  explicitely, I think). Otherwise tk and tkstep should always conflict with
>  each other and replace each other.

IMO, alternatives should not be used for libraries.  /etc/ld.so.conf
already provides a Linux standard way of handling these issues.

David Engel

Reply to: