upgrade screw up
t.golightly at verizon.net
Sun May 23 01:37:11 CEST 2004
On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 17:34, Christopher wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-05-22 at 15:08, Terence Golightly wrote:
> > Greetings,
> > Awhile back I upgraded XFCE4.0.4 to XFCE4.0.5 using Charles Eslarhc's
> > site set up using urpmi. Unfortunately, in my haste forgot that the old
> > version was one I installed using CVS. I know get the following error
> > message:
> > [root at tbox root]# ldconfig
> > ldconfig: /usr/lib/libdbh-1.0.so.1 is not a symbolic link
[terryg at tbox terryg]$ ls -l /usr/lib/libdbh*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 22560 Apr 11 13:41 /usr/lib/libdbh-1.0.so.1*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 22560 Apr 11 13:41 /usr/lib/libdbh-1.0.so.1.0.0*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 Apr 24 22:16 /usr/lib/libdbh-1.0.so.1.0.1
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 53216 Apr 11 13:41 /usr/lib/libdbh.a
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 788 Apr 11 13:41 /usr/lib/libdbh.la*
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 22560 Apr 11 13:41 /usr/lib/libdbh.so*
> > This is probably a simple fix, i.e. set up a symbolic link for the above
> > file run ldconfig again, but I don't know what the name of the symbolic
> > link should be. I googled, but am uncertain which file name to use that
> > for the above library file.
> Take a look at /usr/lib/libdbh.la (it is a text file). One of the
> fields should be library_names=' ... '
> which is a list of the libdbh shared libraries.
[terryg at tbox terryg]$ cat /usr/lib/libdbh.la
# libdbh.la - a libtool library file
# Generated by ltmain.sh - GNU libtool 1.5 (1.1220 2003/04/05 19:32:58)
# Please DO NOT delete this file!
# It is necessary for linking the library.
# The name that we can dlopen(3).
# Names of this library.
library_names='libdbh-1.0.so.1.0.0 libdbh-1.0.so.1 libdbh.so'
# The name of the static archive.
# Libraries that this one depends upon.
# Version information for libdbh.
# Is this an already installed library?
# Should we warn about portability when linking against -modules?
# Files to dlopen/dlpreopen
# Directory that this library needs to be installed in:
> Only one of those
> should be a normal file, the others should be symlinks to it. The one
> with the most suffixes should be the real one (probably
> libdbh-1.0.so.1.0.0) - make sure you actually have it. I guess one of
> the ones that should be a symlink is actually a normal file. So due to
> a bad install or uninstall your libdbh.la file is inconsistent with
> what's on your system (a good reason to install from source).
> If you do indeed have the correct library, instead of just removing the
> offending file and symlinking it I would uninstall and reinstall
> whatever rpm provides libdbh. And after uninstalling make sure all of
> the libdbh files have been removed. If after reinstalling its still in
> the same state - then manually symlink it.
If I uninstall libdbh won't dependencies be broken? If I can get away
with it like leaving X and going to a root screen XFCE won'd be "active"
the it should be safe to do?
> I'm no libtool expert, so I could be wrong about all this - but that's
> where I would start looking.
> Good luck.
> Xfce mailing list
> Xfce at xfce.org
Terry Golightly ... t.golightly at nospamverizon.net ... Pittsburgh, Pa
Mandrake Linux release 10.0 (Official) for i586 kernel
19:27:17 up 7:13, 1 user, load average: 0.02, 0.02, 0.00
Let's remind ourselves that last year's fresh idea is today's cliche. --
More information about the Xfce