| 1 |
On 20/6/19 2:26 am, Jack wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2019.06.19 14:10, Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Wed, 19 Jun 2019 20:45:03 +0800, Bill Kenworthy wrote: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> > wifi ~ # unsymlink-lib --analyze |
| 6 |
>> > /usr/lib needs to be a symlink to lib64! |
| 7 |
>> > wifi ~ # ls -al /usr/lib |
| 8 |
>> > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 Jan 4 13:37 /usr/lib -> /usr/lib64 |
| 9 |
>> > wifi ~ # |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> > The symlink looks the same as another unconverted system - so whats |
| 12 |
>> the |
| 13 |
>> > problem? |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> On this system, /usr/lib is a symlink to lib64, as the message states, |
| 16 |
>> not /usr/lib64 |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
>> % ls -ld /usr/lib |
| 19 |
>> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 5 Jul 16 2015 /usr/lib -> lib64 |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> |
| 22 |
>> -- |
| 23 |
>> Neil Bothwick |
| 24 |
> Ah, I think we've gotten to a bad splitting of hairs. /usr/lib -> |
| 25 |
> lib64 and /usr/lib -> /usr/lib64 have the same effect, but are not |
| 26 |
> quite the same. The first is a relative symlink, the second is |
| 27 |
> absolute, although both actually point to the same place. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> Bill - you might try "rm /usr/lib" WITHOUT the trailing slash, to |
| 30 |
> remove the symlink. Then "ln -s lib64 /usr/lib" will recreate it in |
| 31 |
> the form unsymlink-lib seems to require. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Jack |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Thanks, nicely picked! |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Hair split and now all works as intended. Just found another system |
| 38 |
with the same problem too. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
BillK |
Archives