From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Oct 2 00:30:30 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D17A016A407; Mon, 2 Oct 2006 00:30:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from mx27.mail.ru (mx27.mail.ru [194.67.23.64]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53CF743D5E; Mon, 2 Oct 2006 00:30:30 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from amdmi3@mail.ru) Received: from [213.148.29.33] (port=55449 helo=nexii.panopticon) by mx27.mail.ru with esmtp id 1GUBhU-0009Ec-00; Mon, 02 Oct 2006 04:30:28 +0400 Received: from hades.panopticon (hades.panopticon [192.168.0.2]) by nexii.panopticon (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D47717053; Mon, 2 Oct 2006 04:29:46 +0400 (MSD) Received: by hades.panopticon (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 7FE3F40C9; Mon, 2 Oct 2006 04:30:38 +0400 (MSD) Date: Mon, 2 Oct 2006 04:30:38 +0400 From: Dmitry Marakasov To: Ruslan Ermilov Message-ID: <20061002003038.GB69759@hades.panopticon> Mail-Followup-To: Ruslan Ermilov , cvs-src@FreeBSD.org References: <200609291934.k8TJYcXo038707@repoman.freebsd.org> <20060930144627.GA16298@hades.panopticon> <20060930153048.GC39704@rambler-co.ru> <20061001005802.GA47847@hades.panopticon> <20061001175617.GA25654@rambler-co.ru> <20061001205105.GA69759@hades.panopticon> <20061001211204.GE28840@rambler-co.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20061001211204.GE28840@rambler-co.ru> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src ObsoleteFiles.inc X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Oct 2006 00:30:30 -0000 * Ruslan Ermilov (ru@FreeBSD.org) wrote: > > Yes, that seem correct for me. The only thing that bugs me is .so > > symlinks. Shouldn't these be listed as well as OLD_FILES? > Why? They are still there at the same location: > > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 20 Sep 10 20:59 /usr/lib/libpthread.so -> /lib/libpthread.so.2 > lrwxr-xr-x 1 root wheel 17 Sep 10 20:59 /usr/lib/libpcap.so -> /lib/libpcap.so.4 > > (The .so links are used when linking the program dynamically. > They are not needed for running a dynamically linked program.) Ah, yes, I've forgot that there are no links in /lib. Then it's all ok now, thanks. -- Best regards, Dmitry mailto:amdmi3@mail.ru