On Mon, 2002-04-08 at 13:45, Adam C Powell IV wrote: > > I just received bug #141738 against petsc2.1.1-doc saying that links > from /usr/share/doc/petsc2.1.1-doc/include are going to > /lib/petscdir/2.1.1/include instead of /usr/lib/petscdir/2.1.1/include. > > This is really odd, as I made them using dh_link and the links seem > correct (../../../.. should be /usr, right?), but indeed, they give file > not found errors when I try to inspect the files. > > But what's *really* bizarre is: > > cd /usr/share/doc/petsc2.1.1-doc/include > ls .. [gives what I'd expect, /usr/share/doc/petsc2.1.1-doc contents] > ls ../.. [gives what I'd expect, /usr/share/doc contents] > ls ../../.. [gives what I'd expect, /usr/share contents] > ls ../../../.. gives not /usr, but root! > > What's wrong with the system, such that this happens -- for both me and > the bug reporter? And why has this changed since I first made the > symlinks and tested them, and they worked? > > I don't think this is a PETSc bug, but something deeper...
I can't reproduce this (but keep in mind that the .. entry in a directory can theoretically point anywhere), but why don't you use absolute link targets anyway? Looks like they would be shorter and less error prone here. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
