Comment 8 for bug 37598

# strings /usr/lib/libGL.so.1|grep ^lib
libX11.so.6
libXext.so.6
libm.so.6
libpthread.so.0
libXxf86vm.so.1
libdl.so.2
libdrm.so.1
libc.so.6
libGL.so.1

So libdrm.so.1 seems to be a *hard* dependency there.

Hmm, I found it:

# ls -l libGL*
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 16 2006-04-02 12:52 libGL.so.1 -> libGL.so.1.2.old
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 406824 2006-03-23 17:04 libGL.so.1.2
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 407720 2005-10-24 19:53 libGL.so.1.2.old
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 20 2006-03-26 09:19 libGLU.so.1 -> libGLU.so.1.3.060401
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 479244 2006-03-23 17:04 libGLU.so.1.3.060401

Now the question is: shouldn't libgl1-mesa touch (i.e.: mangle) the symlink on installation, or at least provide a fat warning that the symlink doesn't point to the newly installed version of libGL.so.1?