Re: Question on bad links?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 16 Sep 2022 at 8:48, stan wrote:
Date sent:       Fri, 16 Sep 2022 08:48:29 -0700
From:            stan <upaitag@xxxxxxxx>
To:              users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Copies to:       mikes@xxxxxxxx
Subject:         Re: Question on bad links?
Organization:    zohofree
> On Fri, 16 Sep 2022 14:55:11 +1000
> "Michael D. Setzer II via users" <users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I've run this little script from time to time in /
> >
> > find . -xtype l >/badlinks 2>ERR
> > grep -v '/proc\|/run' </badlinks >/badlinks-clean
> >
> > At present ends up with other 300 lines in the
> > badlinks-clean
> >
> > Cleaned up a number of bad lines in a jre directory that
> > seemed to be left over stuff from fc27 to fc33? Nothing
> > from fc34?? and the reset were the currect fc35 files I
> > have on system. Seems things that just got left??
> >
> > Not sure if it is coming to have these on a system?
> >
> > Wonder if someone with a lot more knowledge than I
> > have might know best option. Just leave them, remove
> > some, remove all? Figured the ones in /proc and /run
> > should be left alone??
>
> I don't have a lot more knowledge than you do, but a symbolic link that
> points to nothing, is broken, is useless.  Anything that depends on
> finding what it expects at the end of the link is going to break.
> So, my opinion is that removing them is harmless.  If your system is
> working correctly, then leaving them is also harmless, other than the
> cruft it represents, because they aren't being accessed (or you would
> be getting errors).
>
> The proc / run links are temporary, in that the proc / run filesystem
> is created each boot, so deleting them is pointless.  It doesn't make
> sense that there are all those broken links.  Could the find be
> incorrect in some way?  By that I mean that it is issuing false
> positives.  When I run the command
> find /proc -L -type l | less
> or
> find /run -L -type l | less
> I get no broken links.
>
> From the find man page for -type l,
> l      symbolic  link; this is never true if the -L option or the
> -follow option is in effect, unless the symbolic link is broken.  If
> you want to search for symbolic links when -L is in effect, use
> -xtype.
>
> So, using find /proc -L -type l returns true if a link is broken.  Note
> that the default for find is -P, never follow symbolic links, which
> your command will use.
Not clear on differnce be -l and -L?
find . -xtype l >/badlinks 2>ERR
grep -v '/proc\|/run' </badlinks >/badlinks-clean
Comparing the badlinks and badlinks-clean.
wc -l badlink*
  647 badlinks
  321 badlinks-clean
  968 total
Looking at one of the lines reported.
ls /run/systemd/units/invocation\:systemd-fsck-root.service -l
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 32 Sep 11 19:46 /run/systemd/units/invocation:systemd-fsck-root.service -> df1352a57bbc4b7ab5327327184ff57d
The /run/systemd/units/invocation:systemd-fsck-root.service displays in a dark red with the df1352a57bbc4b7ab5327327184ff57d
displays as white letters on a bright red background.
Seems all files in that directory link to files that are not there?
Example from last of badlinks-clean
ls -l extlinux.conf
lrwxrwxrwx. 1 root root 30 Jul 24  2021 extlinux.conf -> ../boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf
Same colors on link and there is no ../boot/extlinux/extlinux.conf file, but many other files do exist in that directory.
In looking at the -L option, it seems that takes info from file it links to, so if the file it links to doesn't exist then woul expect it not to show anything?
+------------------------------------------------------------+
 Michael D. Setzer II - Computer Science Instructor (Retired)    
 mailto:mikes@xxxxxxxx                           
 mailto:msetzerii@xxxxxxxxx
 Guam - Where America's Day Begins                       
 G4L Disk Imaging Project maintainer
 http://sourceforge.net/projects/g4l/
+------------------------------------------------------------+
_______________________________________________
users mailing list -- users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to users-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [EPEL Devel]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux