> The problem is caused by ldconfig; when it is run in the xlib postrm, it > deletes the .so link. It doesn't replace this link when it's run in the > xlib postinst.
This is why I suggested a couple of days ago that ldconfig should not be run from any postrm scripts. It should only be run from postinst scripts. > Can this be considered to be a bug in ldconfig? Which part, deleting the link in the first place or not recreating it? The latter is not a bug. Ldconfig will never create the links needed by ld as long as I'm maintaining it. I'm open to suggestions on how to correct the former problem. What I'm leaning towards is to have ldconfig continue to remove dangling libfoo.so.* links but not libfoo.so links. David -- David Engel Optical Data Systems, Inc. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 1101 E. Arapaho Road (214) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081