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

Re: [SLUG] Why does my executable not well.....Execute!



On Wed, 20 Jun 2001, Peter Rundle wrote:

> On Rh7.1
> 
>   $ ldd `which xsnow`
>   /usr/bin/ldd: /usr/X11R6/bin/xsnow: No such file or directory

I'm assuming the binary is actually there and whatnot.  If so, this error
should *not* happen.  If a library is not available, it should tell you, but
this is saying that file /usr/X11R6/bin/xsnow doesn't exist.  Curious.

> On Rh6.2
> 
>    $ ldd `which xsnow`
>    libXext.so.6 => /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib/libXext.so.6 (0x40014000)
>    libX11.so.6 => /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x4001e000)
>    libm.so.5 => /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib/libm.so.5 (0x400b0000)
>    libc.so.5 => /usr/i486-linux-libc5/lib/libc.so.5 (0x400b8000)

<raises eyebrows> Mmmmkay.  How old is RH 6.2 again?  I wouldn't have
thought they would have been so perverse as to build programs against libc5
after glibc2 came out, but you learn something new everyday.

> Hmmm, ok so we look on the rh7.1 install and find libXext.so.6 and
> libX11.so.6 but libm.so.5 and libc.so.5 are missing. I thought that
> Linux had this library version thing under control. Like the binary
> looks for libm.so not libm.so.5. What's going on Linux this is looking
> like a bad case of windows ddl hell.

Overexaggeration.  At least on Linux we can version our libraries so that
when the interface changes without the name changing things don't go quietly
haywire.

If you install the relevant libraries (properly, of course) it *will* work.

> So I grab the libs off the Rh6.2 box and stick them on the 7.1 box
> and....Nothing works :-(

Are they in an easily accessible location?  Do all the relevant symlinks
exist?  Have you run ldconfig and does ldconfig -p tell you that they're
available?  Also, it may be that ldd is screwing you over, rather than the
libraries themselves.

> Backward binary compatiblity between kernels Hah!

Yes, that is a conscious decision on the part of the Kernel Cabal (there is
no cabal (tm)) to ensure that the kernel stays free of cruft.  It would be
a serious problem if we didn't have source code to basically everything,
allowing *any* member of the user community (assuming sufficient Clue) to
update any program and rebuild for the new version.

> What's the time line look like for a stable version of Debian on
> the 2.4 kernel?

"The future... is now".

There have been a set of updated kernel-related packages for Potato for some
time.  Point your sources.list at them and you're away.

No, I don't know the URL.  Woody is good enough for me (and my users).


-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
#include <disclaimer.h>
Matthew Palmer
mjp16@nospam.ieee.uow.edu.au


-- 
SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/
More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug