On Wednesday 13 November 2002 04:50 pm, Ravenhall wrote: > Package: libstdc++3 > Version: 1:3.0.4-13 > > After running a dist-upgrade today from unstable, several programs > (including apt-cache, apt-get, and mozilla) would give the following > error when attempting to launch them from a console: > > error while loading shared libraries: libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3: > cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory > > I checked out /usr/lib, and found that > /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 indeed did not exist. I > guesstimated from the existing symlinks that this should be linked to > /usr/lib/libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so. I created the link with (as > root): > ln -s /usr/lib/libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so > /usr/lib/libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 > > This then allowed me to use my programs as normal. > There IS a similar link in /usr/lib, namely: > > /usr/lib/libstdc++libc6.2-2.so.3, linked to > libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so > > as well as: > /usr/lib/libstdc++libc6.2-2.a.3, linked to > libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.a > > Is it possible that these symlinks were typos? It appears that > libstdc++ in both of these links should have been written as > libstdc++- so I believe that these are typos. snip > Thanks, > Nathan Waddell
Something of the sort happened here. I grabed Evolution1.2 7 Gimp1.3 + depends and i get a similar error message. The difference I see between my unstable box & woody box is the syntax? of the linked file woody: libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 -> libstdc++-3-libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so unstable: libstdc++libc6.2-2.so.3 -> libstdc++-3libc6.2-2-2.10.0.so there may be other differences but what is the significants of the additional (-) after libstdc++ in the woody example? -- Greg Madden Debian GNU/Linux -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
