SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS Archives

April 2005

SCIENTIFIC-LINUX-USERS@LISTSERV.FNAL.GOV

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
John Franks <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 3 Apr 2005 08:32:14 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
On Sun, 2005-04-03 at 14:18 +0100, Alan J. Flavell wrote:
> On Sun, 3 Apr 2005, John Franks quoted me:
> 
> > > -rw-r--r--    1 root     root            0 Apr  3 12:48 
> > > /etc/gtk-2.0/gdk-pixbuf.loaders
> 
> [...]
> 
> > It is failing because the pixbuf.loaders script has been
> > moved to a subdirectory named i686-redhat-linux-gnu instead of 
> > i386-redhat-linux-gnu.
> 
> Could I just stress that the anomalous file entry that I'm
> talking about is in *neither* of those places, but is in the
> directory /etc/gtk-2.0/ above.
> 

Yes, but I suspect it is left by the upgrade script nevertheless.
I have checked some other systems and as extra data points I will
mention that the same anomalous file (always empty) exists on genuine
RHEL3.U4 (upgraded from RHEL3.U3) and on Fedora Core 3 upgraded from
Fedora Core 2.  In all cases the the file has the same date as the last
upgrade of librsvg2. 

Since the file is (1) empty and (2) not owned by any package, I am
fairly sure it is innocuous and safe to remove.

John

ATOM RSS1 RSS2