Date: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 14:00:45 -0500 From: Robert Huff <roberthuff@rcn.com> To: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: superfluous libraries? Message-ID: <16850.65245.133177.837563@jerusalem.litteratus.org> In-Reply-To: <44fz1px7uu.fsf@be-well.ilk.org> References: <16850.9035.858785.417563@jerusalem.litteratus.org> <44fz1px7uu.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Lowell Gilbert writes: > > ** /usr/local/lib/libssl.so.3 is shadowed by /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 > > /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 <- ? > > /usr/local/lib/libssl.so.3 <- openssl-0.9.7e_1 > > --> This may be an undesirable situation > > Leave /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (specify -i to ask on this) > > > > Is there any reason not to delete the versions that came from > > openssl-0.9.7e_1? Obviously I don't want to delete the port, but > > these particular files? > > It sounds like you don't want to use the port's version of the > libraries. I see no reason to have two copies of the same object around, (except for backup, which isn't the case here). I'd also like to get rid of the warnings. :-) > If that's the case, you *can* delete the port. I was reluctant to delete the port because it also has a bunch of header (.h) files et al.. If those come with the base distribution, then I _can_ delete the port without harm. Thanks. Robert Huff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?16850.65245.133177.837563>