On 20 Sep 2022 at 1:35, Jon LaBadie wrote:
Date sent: Tue, 20 Sep 2022 01:35:02 -0400 From: Jon LaBadie jonfu@jgcomp.com To: users@lists.fedoraproject.org Subject: Re: Question on bad links? Send reply to: Community support for Fedora users users@lists.fedoraproject.org
On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 10:53:53AM -0400, Jonathan Billings wrote:
On Sep 16, 2022, at 20:44, Michael D. Setzer II via users users@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
Was not aware of that program? Was already installed on my system. Following instructions from link, it found 279 of the broken links under /usr and after checking, I went ahead are removed them. Doing the run using / instead of /usr it comes up with the other 29 in various placed. That includes the one I created for test earlier, but is 28 I'll have to look into more. Using the symlink to fix the 279 seems good
Why do you care about broken symlinks again? What harm are they causing? Because looking at the following output makes me think you’re just going to break stuff.
Wish there was a better term than "BROKEN" for symlinks whose target does not currently exist. There certainly are use cases for symlinks that point to files "when they are available".
symlinks actually refers to them ad dangling... man symlinks gives more info
Each link is output with a classification of relative, absolute, dangling, messy, lengthy, or other_fs.
saw one thing that showd using it on /usr symlinks -r /usr That just displays what it finds. symlinks -rcsd /usr Seems to be the extreme to delete dangling and change message and lengthy ones.
Don't want to mess with the ones in /proc or /run
symlink -r / reports others that might exist, but would be careful on updating them, and work do individual directories.
On this system I get. symlinks -r / | cut -f1 -d: | sort | uniq -c 490 absolute 23 dangling 1 messy 56 other_fs
Was getting like 321 badlinks listed but elimanating from listing ones with /run /proc or docker I get these.
./root/.mozilla/firefox/u3x6t962.default-release/lock ./home/msetzerii/.mozilla/firefox/bkk7du3z.default-1642065035746/lock ./etc/extlinux.conf
The .mozilla ones were mentioned in a message as being similar to what is done in the /run /proc and docker ones. The /etc/extlinux.conf just seems to be a broken one???
Don't know if fixing the messy or lengthy ones makes a real difference, but seems cleaner if nothing else.
My backup software uses virtual tapes (vtapes) and a virtual tape changer. My changer has 240 symlink "slots". The vtapes are on removable disks. If a disk is in offsite storage, or is otherwise not mounted, an entire group of "slots" are broken symlinks. But that is not an error, those slots are just "empty".
I'd hate for some nimwit* admin to remove those broken symlinks.
Jon
- It would be like the time a nimwit admin of a multi-user
computer (300 users) came home from a security class learning that "setuid programs were bad". Over the weekend they used chmod to remove the setuid bit of every program on the system. Resulted in a few problems Monday morning.
-- Jon H. LaBadie jonfu@jgcomp.com _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
+------------------------------------------------------------+ Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired) mailto:mikes@guam.net mailto:msetzerii@gmail.com Guam - Where America's Day Begins G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/ +------------------------------------------------------------+