Re: Can ldso be removed or does deborphan have a bug?
> > Well, you got any of these installed? They appear to be the only
> > ones that depend on it from my quick check. I would suspect that
> > you have either libc5 or libc6 installed at least, but if you don't
> > have any of these, there would be nothing listing a dependancy that
> > I can see. So, deborphan would be correct as far as I can tell.
> >
> > Package: pump
> > Package: nextawg
> > Package: nextaw
> > Package: libc5
> > Package: libc6
>
> That was the case for potato. For woody and above, libc6 no longer
> needs ldso, so you only need it if you have older programs that
> depend on libc4 or libc5.
So, it would be safer to remove libc4 first, then libc5, and, if no
dependency complaints at that point, then remove ldso ??
I'm not completely sure if I understood it right. I'm using Sid, but
the original installation was done with the potato 2.2r0 CDs.
I've removed already most of the old libs and those with no
dependencies. Only ldso (whose message scared me) and a couple more
still remain.
--
Daniel Toffetti --- 'There is no spoon...' - The Matrix
Running Debian Sid version testing/unstable with Linux 2.4.13 i686
Reply to: