Re: Help! Binaries link both libc5+libc6!
On Tue, Mar 10, 1998 at 09:32:48AM +0100, jdassen@wi.leidenuniv.nl wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 09, 1998 at 01:58:29PM -0600, Jeff Noxon wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 09, 1998 at 02:01:10PM -0500, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> > > I just installed Raima's Velocis Server 2.0 on an up-to-date hamm
> > > machine. The binaries do not run (segfault), and when I run ldd I
> > > get this:
> > >
> > > This means that there is an upstream problem. If you do not sources,
> > > there is nothing you can do but complain.
> >
> > Any idea what they could have done to cause this? They are working with
> > the developer right now to try to come up with a solution. They're
> > running RedHat.
>
> It could be that their binaries or libraries have been linked with -rpath
> (causing the directory search path to be hardwired into binaries); this has
> caused problems with Red Hat / Triteal CDE on a hamm system.
>
> You can use "objdump --all-headers" on the binaries and libraries to check
> if there's an "RPATH" setting.
There is no rpath. This is a message I got back from their tech support
people. Can anyone think of a workaround? I hate to go back to bo.
-- cut here --
Hello Jeff,
I'm afraid I don't have a good answer for you. We have had a similar
problem with Red Hat 5.0 and the following statement was made by our
development manager:
"This release 2.0.XXX of Velocis will *not* be compatible with libc.6
(glibc-2) based Linux releases such as Red Hat 5.0. Because of the
drastic nature of the changes to libc (and indirectly the thread
library) in these versions, applications built to be compatbile with the
earlier versions of Linux, such as 4.2, must continue to use the set of
dynamic libraries included with libc.5 on previous Linuxes. However,
because libpthread.0.5 and libpthread.0.6 cannot usefully coexist on the
same system (since they have the same major version number) and
libpthread.0.6 is linked to libc.6, the set of libraries needed by
Velocis is not completely provided by the backward compatibility set of
libraries. While this problem could probably have been worked around by
a change in the linkage of some libraries to Velocis, it would have been
of minimal value. This is the case because Velocis libraries are
'libc.5' libraries themselves and any database application requiring
them would have to be built in a complete 'libc.5' development
environment (i.e., compiler configuration, include files, libraries).
While some piecemeal upgraded systems may have such a configuration, the
distributions of the new versions of Linux (e.g., Red Hat 5.0) do not
appear to include all the necessary components.
"Because of the drastic nature of the changes to libc as well as the
substantial changes to headers and threading support incorporated in the
newest versions of Linux, converting a large and complicated application
such as Velocis to it and assuring its quality are not a trivial
exercise, even disregarding the inevitable problems in such a
substantially modified OS environment early in its own release cycle.
It is Raima's goal to provide a high quality and usable product. Our
evaluation of the above factors augmented by experiments with Red Hat
5.0 indicated that it would not be possible to meet these goals within
the timeline of this release.
"It is our intention to have a libc.6 compatible version available with
the next release of Velocis."
In addition, I checked specifically with our Linux guru, and got this
reply:
"This is pretty much the same problem that was originally affecting us
on Red Hat 5.0.
If for whatever reason the dynamic linker thinks you are linked to two
different versions
of libc, you die and die very early. As with Red Hat 5.0, unless the
customer has a
complete libc5 environment on his system (compilers, libraries,
includes, etc.) he
might as well not mess with it as he will be heading into the same
morass that brought
the Red Hat 5.0 customer to a stop. If he does by some chance have the
full libc5
environment, this problem can probably be worked around, possible by
messing
with the dynamic library path."
It may be that the Debian versions of the libc libraries are not so
incompatible, but we cannot test that ourselves. My only other
suggestion at this point would be to continue the evaluation on another
platform. Scott Meder indicated to me that you also run with AIX, as
well as Windows/NT. Both of these are included on the evaluation CD.
-- cut here --
--
E-mail the word "unsubscribe" to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST. Trouble? E-mail to listmaster@debian.org .
Reply to: