Bug#422179: marked as done (libc6: /lib/libc.so.6: file not recognized: File format not recognized)
Your message dated Sat, 05 May 2007 23:03:14 +0200
with message-id <463CF112.6030407@aurel32.net>
and subject line Bug#422179: libc6: /lib/libc.so.6: file not recognized: File format not recognized
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
Package: libc6
Version: 2.5-5
Severity: normal
linux-2.6.20.11# make oldconfig
HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep
/lib/libc.so.6: file not recognized: File format not recognized
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 1
make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2
Downgrading to 2.5-4 fixes the problem.
-- System Information:
Debian Release: lenny/sid
APT prefers unstable
APT policy: (500, 'unstable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.18 (SMP w/2 CPU cores)
Locale: LANG=en_US, LC_CTYPE=en_US (charmap=ISO-8859-1)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
David Liontooth a écrit :
> Aurelien Jarno wrote:
>> David Liontooth a écrit :
>>
>>> Package: libc6
>>> Version: 2.5-5
>>> Severity: normal
>>>
>>>
>>> linux-2.6.20.11# make oldconfig
>>> HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep
>>> /lib/libc.so.6: file not recognized: File format not recognized
>>> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
>>> make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 1
>>> make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2
>>>
>>> Downgrading to 2.5-4 fixes the problem.
>>>
>> Which version of binutils is installed on your system?
>>
> 2.17-3 -- and I see 2.17cvs20070426-4 is available. Upgrading solved the
> problems I had run into.
>
> Thank you and please close. If this is a dependency, shouldn't we
> enforce it?
>
It's not really a dependency, because not all users need to install
binutils on their system.
A conflict would be more appropriate, but this could break upgrades. I
will close this bug for now, we will try to find a solution if too much
users encounter this problem.
--
.''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
: :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer
`. `' aurel32@debian.org | aurelien@aurel32.net
`- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net
--- End Message ---
Reply to: