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

Where are XF86VidModeQueryVersion and XF86VidModeGetModeLine?OD



How does one find the package conaining the library containing the 
definition of a specific external symbol?  Packages.org seems to enable 
me to locate a package from parts of its name of parts of the names of 
its constituent files, but I need to resolve an external reference.

Or are one of my packages defective?  The stuff worked when using sarge 
on an i686 machine.  Is this just a temporary symptom of a 
distribution in 
transition?

Here are the technical details, originally posted on debian-user without 
response.

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 06:41:49PM -0400, hendrik@topoi.pooq.com wrote:
> I hace compiled a program many times on an a386 etch system using the 
> command:
> 
> gcc -g -L/usr/lib/ -lglut -lGLU -lGL -ljpeg rj.c jp.c -o i686/jp
> 
> Now, however, I am compiling it on an AMD64 machine, also running etch.  
> The command I used is  
> 
> gcc -g -L/usr/lib/ -lglut -lGLU -lGL -ljpeg rj.c jp.c -o x86_64/jp
> 
> Much the same, except I use an architecture-specific directory for my 
> architecture-specific object file.
> 
> But on AND-64 I get 
> 
> gcc -g -L/usr/lib/ -lglut -lGLU -lGL -ljpeg rj.c jp.c -o x86_64/jp
> /usr/lib//libGL.a(glxcmds.o): In function `glXGetMscRateOML':
> (.text+0x2da1): undefined reference to `XF86VidModeQueryVersion'
> /usr/lib//libGL.a(glxcmds.o): In function `glXGetMscRateOML':
> (.text+0x2dd4): undefined reference to `XF86VidModeGetModeLine'
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> make: *** [x86_64/jp] Error 1
> hendrik@april:~/dv/im$
> 
> Now presumably this means that some library is missing.  Or contains 
> maverick references to XF86 code (my systems both run xorg, and have not 
> been promoted to xorg 7.0 yet.)  I'm not sure the problem is 
> AMD-64-specific; I might well have accidentally done something weird in 
> the course of history.
> 
> What's missing?  Or is one of the libraries defective on AMD64?
> 
> -- hendrik



Reply to: