superfluous libraries?

[Lowell Gilbert]

Robert Huff <roberthuff at rcn.com> writes:

> Lowell Gilbert writes:
> 
> >  > ** /usr/local/lib/libssl.so.3 is shadowed by /usr/lib/libssl.so.3
> >  >         /usr/lib/libssl.so.3    <- ?
> >  >         /usr/local/lib/libssl.so.3      <- openssl-0.9.7e_1
> >  >  --> This may be an undesirable situation
> >  > Leave /usr/lib/libssl.so.3 (specify -i to ask on this)
> >  > 
> >  > 	Is there any reason not to delete the versions that came from
> >  > openssl-0.9.7e_1?  Obviously I don't want to delete the port, but
> >  > these particular files?
> >  
> >  It sounds like you don't want to use the port's version of the
> >  libraries.
> 
> 	I see no reason to have two copies of the same object around,
> (except for backup, which isn't the case here).  I'd also like to
> get rid of the warnings.  :-)

There can be some reasons for wanting both, but you would already knew
if one of them affected you.

> >  If that's the case, you *can* delete the port.
> 
> 	I was reluctant to delete the port because it also has a bunch
> of header (.h) files et al..  If those come with the base
> distribution, then I _can_ delete the port without harm.

That will be perfectly safe.  The headers you might need are in
/usr/include/openssl/.