Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 29 Sep 2005 08:28:13 -0700
From:      Gary Kline <kline@tao.thought.org>
To:        Gerard Seibert <gerard@seibercom.net>
Cc:        FreeBSD Questions <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Shadowed Files
Message-ID:  <20050929152813.GA1450@thought.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050928163600.C30755@seibercom.net>
References:  <20050928163600.C30755@seibercom.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Sep 28, 2005 at 04:42:15PM -0400, Gerard Seibert wrote:
> When running 'portsclean', this message is displayed:
> 
> ** /usr/local/lib/libcrypto.so.3 is shadowed by /lib/libcrypto.so.3
>          /lib/libcrypto.so.3     <- ?
>          /usr/local/lib/libcrypto.so.3   <- openssl-0.9.8
>   --> This may be an undesirable situation
> Leave /lib/libcrypto.so.3 (specify -i to ask on this)
> 
> ** /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-0.9.8
>   --> This may be an undesirable situation
> Leave /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (specify -i to ask on this)
> 
> Would it be safe to delete the redundant library? I assume that I should 
> remove the /usr/lib/ version and not the /usr/local/lib version.
> 

	No  one has jumped in with advice, so I'd like to know
	if you make any decision:: like mv'ing, say,
	/lib/libcrypto.so.3 to /lib/libcrypto.so.3.tmp
	and see what hits the fan.  If anything.  

	I'm working, carefully, on upgrading my three FBSD 
	platforms and saw the same thing you have with portsclean.
	I also used libchk, but it didn't help very much.
	So I'm wondering too.

	(NOT to complain, but how does Linux/Ubuntulinux keep its
	systems free of excess libs?)

	gary




-- 
   Gary Kline     kline@thought.org   www.thought.org     Public service Unix




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050929152813.GA1450>