libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

[Debian Bug Importer]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #302213 http://bugs.debian.org/302213

[Josselin Mouette (joss)]

Le mercredi 30 mars 2005 à 19:03 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a écrit :
> Package: libgtk2.0-bin
> Version: 2.6.2-4
> Severity: grave

> gnumeric: relocation error: /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0: undefined
> symbol: g_option_context_new
>
> The file mentioned above (/usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0) is, in turn,
> a part of the package libgtk2.0-dev_2.6.2-4_i386.deb - so perhaps the
> bug is here?

This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.

I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
local versions just to fuck up their system?
--
 .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : <email address hidden>
`. `' <email address hidden>
  `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Automatically imported from Debian bug report #302213 http://bugs.debian.org/302213

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 19:03:25 +0200
From: "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

Package: libgtk2.0-bin
Version: 2.6.2-4
Severity: grave

*** Please type your report below this line ***

This is what I see since some time, when trying to upgrade Debian packages:

   gutow:/home/gutow# apt-get install --reinstall libgtk2.0-bin
   Reading Package Lists... Done
   Building Dependency Tree... Done
   0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 1 reinstalled, 0 to remove and 27 not
   upgraded.
   2 not fully installed or removed.
   Need to get 0B of archives.
   After unpacking 0B of additional disk space will be used.
   Do you want to continue? [Y/n] y
   Setting up libgtk2.0-0 (2.6.2-4) ...

   Setting up libgtk2.0-bin (2.6.2-4) ...
   Updating the IM modules list for GTK+-2.4.0...Cannot load module
   /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/immodules/im-xim.so:
   /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/immodules/im-xim.so: undefined symbol:
   g_assert_warning
   /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/immodules/im-xim.so does not export GTK+ IM
   module API: /usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/immodules/im-xim.so: undefined
   symbol: g_assert_warning
   dpkg: error processing libgtk2.0-bin (--configure):
    subprocess post-installation script returned error exit status 1
   Errors were encountered while processing:
    libgtk2.0-bin
   E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1)
   gutow:/home/gutow#

The file "usr/lib/gtk-2.0/2.4.0/immodules/im-xim.so" is a part
of the package reported here (and only this package), namely
libgtk2.0-0_2.6.2-4_i386.deb

The result is that many applications will not start any more
(gnumeric, gimp, g3data, gcalctool, ...). They all report errors
similar to:

   gnumeric: relocation error: /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0: undefined
     symbol: g_option_context_new

The file mentioned above (/usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0) is, in turn,
a part of the package libgtk2.0-dev_2.6.2-4_i386.deb - so perhaps the
bug is here?

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
   APT prefers testing
   APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.4.24
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=pl_PL (charmap=ISO-8859-2)

Versions of packages libgtk2.0-bin depends on:
ii libatk1.0-0 1.8.0-4 The ATK accessibility toolkit
ii libc6 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Shared
libraries an
ii libfontconfig1 2.3.1-2 generic font configuration
library
ii libfreetype6 2.1.7-2.3 FreeType 2 font engine,
shared lib
ii libglib2.0-0 2.6.3-1 The GLib library of C routines
ii libgtk2.0-0 2.6.2-4 The GTK+ graphical user
interface
ii libpango1.0-0 1.8.1-1 Layout and rendering of
internatio
ii libx11-6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System protocol
client li
ii libxcursor1 1.1.3-1 X cursor management library
ii libxext6 4.3.0.dfsg.1-10 X Window System
miscellaneous exte
ii libxft2 2.1.2-6 FreeType-based font drawing
librar
ii libxi6 4...

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <email address hidden>
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2005 20:11:57 +0200
From: Josselin Mouette <email address hidden>
To: "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>, <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

--=-BaMm5/iJR/S2h8EauT4X
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Le mercredi 30 mars 2005 =C3=A0 19:03 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a =C3=A9crit=
 :
> Package: libgtk2.0-bin
> Version: 2.6.2-4
> Severity: grave

> gnumeric: relocation error: /usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0: undefined
> symbol: g_option_context_new
>=20
> The file mentioned above (/usr/lib/libgtk-x11-2.0.so.0) is, in turn,
> a part of the package libgtk2.0-dev_2.6.2-4_i386.deb - so perhaps the
> bug is here?

This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.

I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
local versions just to fuck up their system?
--=20
 .''`. Josselin Mouette /\./\
: :' : <email address hidden>
`. `' <email address hidden>
  `- Debian GNU/Linux -- The power of freedom

--=-BaMm5/iJR/S2h8EauT4X
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: Ceci est une partie de message
 =?ISO-8859-1?Q?num=E9riquement?= =?ISO-8859-1?Q?_sign=E9e?=

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.0 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQBCSuvsrSla4ddfhTMRAqUWAJ9rAgaxAm6D2p8i8kreZoG9J7NSrQCghOxO
blITqBSlR0IUGFhezjinD5I=
=Yz6I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-BaMm5/iJR/S2h8EauT4X--

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

due to a local build

[Marek W. Gutowski (gutow-ifpan)]

Josselin Mouette wrote:
  >
> This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.
>
> I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
> local versions just to fuck up their system?

I understand your irritation, but look below:

gutow:/home/gutow# dpkg -l glib*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
un glibc <none> (no description available)
un glibc-2.3.2.ds <none> (no description available)
ii glibc-doc 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Documentation
un glibc-pic <none> (no description available)
un glibc2 <none> (no description available)
un glibcdoc <none> (no description available)
gutow:/home/gutow#

so your guess is clearly incorrect. My system is clean. It is sarge,
installed from scratch and later upgraded many times, always using
'apt-get' mechanism. Don't blame the users, please. The troubles
started after one of such upgrades, but went unnoticed for some
time (I didn't know that some applications no longer start).
Trying to install glibc or glibc2 (is that what you meant as on
older version of glib?) produces the following messages:

gutow:/home/gutow# apt-get -s install glibc
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Package glibc is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source
E: Package glibc has no installation candidate
gutow:/home/gutow# apt-get -s install glibc2
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Package glibc2 is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source
However the following packages replace it:
   locales
E: Package glibc2 has no installation candidate

Therefore there IS a bug somewhere.

--
Marek Gutowski, <email address hidden>
Institute of Physics, ON-3.2, Al. Lotnikow 32/46,
(PL) 02-668 Warszawa, POLAND, tel. [phone] ext. 3122
 >> To talk or not to talk? Yes, talk, plain ASCII please <<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 à 11:19 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a écrit :
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >
> > This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.
> >
> > I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
> > local versions just to fuck up their system?
>
> I understand your irritation, but look below:
>
> gutow:/home/gutow# dpkg -l glib*

hi,

glib is libglib2.0-0.

What is the output of "ldd /usr/bin/<an_app_using_gtk> | grep glib" ?

Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 à 11:19 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a écrit :
>
>>Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> >
>>
>>>This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.
>>>
>>>I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
>>>local versions just to fuck up their system?
>>
>>I understand your irritation, but look below:
>>
>>gutow:/home/gutow# dpkg -l glib*
>
>
> hi,
>
> glib is libglib2.0-0.
>
> What is the output of "ldd /usr/bin/<an_app_using_gtk> | grep glib" ?
>

Hi,
thakns for the prompt reply. Here is the requested output:

gutow:/home/gutow# ldd /usr/bin/gnumeric | grep "glib"
         libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x4095d000)
gutow:/home/gutow# ldd /usr/bin/g3data | grep "glib"
         libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x40458000)
gutow:/home/gutow# ldd /usr/bin/gimp | grep "glib"
         libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0x4059c000)
gutow:/home/gutow# ldd /usr/bin/yank | grep "glib"
         libglib-1.2.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-1.2.so.0 (0x40b3a000)

(The last application works as usual).
In addition I have detected:

gutow@gutow/~/fortran/gielda/6% sudo find / -name 'libglib-2.0*'
/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.la
/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.a
/usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so
/usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.400.4
/usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0
/usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.so
/usr/local/lib/libglib-2.0.la
gutow@gutow/~/fortran/gielda/6%

So, indeed, there is something under /usr/local/lib, but,
frankly, I didn't put it there 'by hand'. The first and
last file in /usr/local/lib are real files; second and third
are merely pointers to the first file.
How can I fix this? Do I have to check/reinstall nearly
70 affected applications? Or, maybe, I should replace
only the two above links to point to /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
from now on?

--
Marek Gutowski, <email address hidden>
Institute of Physics, ON-3.2, Al. Lotnikow 32/46,
(PL) 02-668 Warszawa, POLAND, tel. [phone] ext. 3122
 >> To talk or not to talk? Yes, talk, plain ASCII please <<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Sebastien Bacher (seb128)]

(please keep the bug in the Cc:, I've forwarded the previous mail to
<email address hidden>)

Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 à 12:20 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a écrit :

> So, indeed, there is something under /usr/local/lib, but,
> frankly, I didn't put it there 'by hand'.

The debian packages don't use /usr/local, you have installed these by
hand for sure (with a "make install" or you have used a build
system/autopackage/something).

> The first and
> last file in /usr/local/lib are real files; second and third
> are merely pointers to the first file.

That's how libs work.

> How can I fix this? Do I have to check/reinstall nearly
> 70 affected applications? Or, maybe, I should replace
> only the two above links to point to /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
> from now on?

Just remove the crap you have put in /usr/local and work with the
packages.

I'm closing the bug since that's not due to the packages.

Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:19:04 +0200
From: "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

Josselin Mouette wrote:
  >
> This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib.
>
> I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installing
> local versions just to fuck up their system?

I understand your irritation, but look below:

gutow:/home/gutow# dpkg -l glib*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name Version Description
+++-==============-==============-============================================
un glibc <none> (no description available)
un glibc-2.3.2.ds <none> (no description available)
ii glibc-doc 2.3.2.ds1-20 GNU C Library: Documentation
un glibc-pic <none> (no description available)
un glibc2 <none> (no description available)
un glibcdoc <none> (no description available)
gutow:/home/gutow#

so your guess is clearly incorrect. My system is clean. It is sarge,
installed from scratch and later upgraded many times, always using
'apt-get' mechanism. Don't blame the users, please. The troubles
started after one of such upgrades, but went unnoticed for some
time (I didn't know that some applications no longer start).
Trying to install glibc or glibc2 (is that what you meant as on
older version of glib?) produces the following messages:

gutow:/home/gutow# apt-get -s install glibc
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Package glibc is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source
E: Package glibc has no installation candidate
gutow:/home/gutow# apt-get -s install glibc2
Reading Package Lists... Done
Building Dependency Tree... Done
Package glibc2 is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source
However the following packages replace it:
   locales
E: Package glibc2 has no installation candidate

Therefore there IS a bug somewhere.

--
Marek Gutowski, <email address hidden>
Institute of Physics, ON-3.2, Al. Lotnikow 32/46,
(PL) 02-668 Warszawa, POLAND, tel. [phone] ext. 3122
 >> To talk or not to talk? Yes, talk, plain ASCII please <<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 11:51:12 +0200
From: Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>, "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 =E0 11:19 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a =E9crit :
> Josselin Mouette wrote:
> >
> > This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of gli=
b.
> >=20
> > I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installi=
ng
> > local versions just to fuck up their system?
>=20
> I understand your irritation, but look below:
>=20
> gutow:/home/gutow# dpkg -l glib*

hi,

glib is libglib2.0-0.

What is the output of "ldd /usr/bin/<an_app_using_gtk> | grep glib" ?

Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:32:53 +0200
From: Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol:
 g_assert_warning]

--=-9L9GwBv6Lm17qwDQJtQ8
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

--=-9L9GwBv6Lm17qwDQJtQ8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Description: Message =?ISO-8859-1?Q?transf=E9r=E9?= - Re:
 Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning
Content-Type: message/rfc822

Return-path: <email address hidden>
Envelope-to: seb128@localhost
Delivery-date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:26:46 +0200
Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=localhost) by
 ilinx.intranet with esmtp (Exim 4.44) id 1DGwsv-0003EW-S6 for
 seb128@localhost; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:26:45 +0200
Received: from pop.laposte.net [81.255.54.8] by localhost with POP3
 (fetchmail-6.2.5) for seb128@localhost (single-drop); Thu, 31 Mar 2005
 12:26:45 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from mx.laposte.net (10.150.9.59) by mx.laposte.net (7.0.028) id
 41E44A520315662C for <email address hidden>; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:20:27 +0200
Received: from master.debian.org (146.82.138.7) by mx.laposte.net (7.0.028)
 id 420B7A9902F4AA16 for <email address hidden>; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:20:26 +0200
Received: from sigma.ifpan.edu.pl [148.81.44.1] by master.debian.org with
 esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian)) id 1DGwmn-0002ch-00; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 04:20:25 -0600
Received: from [148.81.45.16] (<email address hidden> [148.81.45.16]) by
 sigma.ifpan.edu.pl (8.12.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id j2VAKNtt027763 for
 <email address hidden>; Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:20:23 +0200
Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:20:44 +0200
From: "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
Organization: Institute of Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8a6) Gecko/20050111
X-Accept-Language: en-US, en, pl
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning
References: <email address hidden> <email address hidden>
 <email address hidden> <email address hidden>
In-Reply-To: <email address hidden>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS[ Milter ]( http://amavis.org/ )
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by sigma.ifpan.edu.pl
 id j2VAKNtt027763
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on ilinx.intranet
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
 version=3.0.2
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 =E0 11:19 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a =E9crit :
>=20
>>Josselin Mouette wrote:
>> >
>>
>>>This is certainly caused by a locally installed, older version of glib=
.
>>>
>>>I have enough of these stupid bug reports. Why do users keep installin=
g
>>>local versions just to fuck up their system?
>>
>>I understand your irritation, but look below:
>>
>>gutow:/home/gut...

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-Id: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:34:44 +0200
From: Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden>
To: <email address hidden>,
 "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

(please keep the bug in the Cc:, I've forwarded the previous mail to
<email address hidden>)

Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 =E0 12:20 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a =E9crit :

> So, indeed, there is something under /usr/local/lib, but,
> frankly, I didn't put it there 'by hand'. =20

The debian packages don't use /usr/local, you have installed these by
hand for sure (with a "make install" or you have used a build
system/autopackage/something).

> The first and
> last file in /usr/local/lib are real files; second and third
> are merely pointers to the first file.

That's how libs work.

> How can I fix this? Do I have to check/reinstall nearly
> 70 affected applications? Or, maybe, I should replace
> only the two above links to point to /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
> from now on?

Just remove the crap you have put in /usr/local and work with the
packages.

I'm closing the bug since that's not due to the packages.

Cheers,

Sebastien Bacher

[Marek W. Gutowski (gutow-ifpan)]

Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> (please keep the bug in the Cc:, I've forwarded the previous mail to
> <email address hidden>)
>
>
> Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 à 12:20 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a écrit :
>
>
>>So, indeed, there is something under /usr/local/lib, but,
>>frankly, I didn't put it there 'by hand'.
>
>
> The debian packages don't use /usr/local, you have installed these by
> hand for sure (with a "make install" or you have used a build
> system/autopackage/something).
>
>
>
>>The first and
>>last file in /usr/local/lib are real files; second and third
>>are merely pointers to the first file.
>
>
> That's how libs work.
>
>
>
>>How can I fix this? Do I have to check/reinstall nearly
>>70 affected applications? Or, maybe, I should replace
>>only the two above links to point to /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
>>from now on?
>
>
> Just remove the crap you have put in /usr/local and work with the
> packages.
>
> I'm closing the bug since that's not due to the packages.
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sebastien Bacher
>
>
Thank you!
I have removed all files libg* (and pointers to them) in
/usr/local/lib directory. This, however, was not enough.
I had to reinstall the packages: libgtk2.0-bin (which
finally got set as it should, with no complaints) and,
in addition:
   libpango1.0-0
   libpango1.0-dev
   libpango1.0-common.
Only after that my applications are in working shape again,
most notably gimp.

--
Marek Gutowski, <email address hidden>
Institute of Physics, ON-3.2, Al. Lotnikow 32/46,
(PL) 02-668 Warszawa, POLAND, tel. [phone] ext. 3122
 >> To talk or not to talk? Yes, talk, plain ASCII please <<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Debian Bug Importer (debzilla)]

Message-ID: <email address hidden>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:20:16 +0200
From: "Marek W. Gutowski" <email address hidden>
To: Sebastien Bacher <email address hidden>
CC: <email address hidden>
Subject: Re: Bug#302213: libgtk2.0-bin: undefined symbol: g_assert_warning

Sebastien Bacher wrote:
> (please keep the bug in the Cc:, I've forwarded the previous mail to
> <email address hidden>)
>=20
>=20
> Le jeudi 31 mars 2005 =E0 12:20 +0200, Marek W. Gutowski a =E9crit :
>=20
>=20
>>So, indeed, there is something under /usr/local/lib, but,
>>frankly, I didn't put it there 'by hand'. =20
>=20
>=20
> The debian packages don't use /usr/local, you have installed these by
> hand for sure (with a "make install" or you have used a build
> system/autopackage/something).
>=20
>=20
>=20
>>The first and
>>last file in /usr/local/lib are real files; second and third
>>are merely pointers to the first file.
>=20
>=20
> That's how libs work.
>=20
>=20
>=20
>>How can I fix this? Do I have to check/reinstall nearly
>>70 affected applications? Or, maybe, I should replace
>>only the two above links to point to /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0.600.3
>>from now on?
>=20
>=20
> Just remove the crap you have put in /usr/local and work with the
> packages.
>=20
> I'm closing the bug since that's not due to the packages.
>=20
>=20
> Cheers,
>=20
> Sebastien Bacher
>=20
>=20
Thank you!
I have removed all files libg* (and pointers to them) in
/usr/local/lib directory. This, however, was not enough.
I had to reinstall the packages: libgtk2.0-bin (which
finally got set as it should, with no complaints) and,
in addition:
   libpango1.0-0
   libpango1.0-dev
   libpango1.0-common.
Only after that my applications are in working shape again,
most notably gimp.

--=20
Marek Gutowski, <email address hidden>
Institute of Physics, ON-3.2, Al. Lotnikow 32/46,
(PL) 02-668 Warszawa, POLAND, tel. [phone] ext. 3122
 >> To talk or not to talk? Yes, talk, plain ASCII please <<
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~