Russ Allbery wrote: >Michael Spang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >I'm pretty sure lintian's behavior here is correct. That message isn't >because the symlink is broken; it's because of exactly the problem that >you discovered. It ascended one too many levels, which means that it was >actually a symlink to: > > /share/mozilla-extensions/greasemonkey > >Since the symlink was in /usr and was pointing to a file in /share, it >correctly triggered the lintian error about relative symlinks between >top-level directories. > >When you changed it to an absolute symlink, you of course fixed where it >was pointing to, and lintian then complained that it should be relative. > >The circumstances under which you arrived at the error ended up being >rather confusing, but I think that lintian was always telling you the >truth. lintian cannot in general warn about dangling symlinks since it's >not uncommon to have the target of the symlink provided by another package >(think development packages for shared libraries, for instance, but there >are other cases). > > > Ah, that makes perfect sense. I'm not sure why I didn't realize this myself. Sorry for the noise. I guess you should close this report. ;-)
Thanks! Michael Spang -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]