[R-sig-Debian] Doubled packages in Debian testing amd64
edd at debian.org
Sun Feb 28 18:41:44 CET 2010
On 28 February 2010 at 16:11, Petar Milin wrote:
| Dirk Eddelbuettel wrote:
| > On 27 February 2010 at 21:36, Petar Milin wrote:
| > | Hello!
| > | I just installed Debian testing amd64, and the fresh R (r-base and
| > | r-base-dev). However, when I installed packages that I use, I realized
| > | that some of them are settled in two palaces: lib and lib64. Why is
| > | that? Is it fine? I hesitate to run my old line for getting rid of
| > | duplicates:
| > | remove.packages(installed.packages()[duplicated(rownames(installed.packages())),1],lib=.libPaths()[.libPaths()
| > | != .Library])
| > | I sense that this duplicates might be for some reason (64-bits and 32-bits).
| > edd at max:/usr$ ls -l
| > total 216
| > [...]
| > drwxr-xr-x 224 root root 69632 2010-02-25 06:40 lib
| > drwxr-xr-x 5 root root 4096 2009-10-31 16:13 lib32
| > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 3 2009-10-07 22:04 lib64 -> lib
| > [...]
| > edd at max:/usr$
| > Dirk
| Sorry for my ignorance, but could you elaborate on that, briefly. lib64
| links to lib?
It means they are the same. A file /usr/lib/foo/bar is identical to
/usr/lib64/foo/bar -- because lib64 is a soft link. It is a convenient "make
So your observation about
[...] that some of them are settled in two palaces: lib and lib64.
Why is that? Is it fine?
is falling victim to this mirage. There is only one file. Hence no problem.
Registration is open for the 2nd International conference R / Finance 2010
See http://www.RinFinance.com for details, and see you in Chicago in April!
More information about the R-SIG-Debian