Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
El 16/09/11 21:28, Trujillo Carmona, Antonio escribió: En mi trabajo estoy montandoun servidor de Virtualización, con Debian stable/testing (por supuesto) Por probar compile la versión de qemu con spice incluido. Como no voy a instalar en el servidor todas les librerías dev, lo hice en el mio y después lo copie (ni que decir tiene que son dos maquinas 64bits, aunque el mio es un AMD y el otro un intel) Después de copiarlo use la orden ldd para ver si tenia que instalar alguna librería que faltara. Instale las que faltaba y esta funcionando, pero mi gran solpresa y por lo que consulta es la diferencia que hay en la salida del ldd en una maquina y otra, ¿es que un programa, después de compilado, puede decidir usar unas librerías o no?, he probalo a instalar alguna de las que no usa y sigue sin usarla. En el servidor root@aulas-1:/usr/local/bin# ldd qemu-spice linux-vdso.so.1 = (0x7fff587ff000) librt.so.1 = /lib/librt.so.1 (0x7fde59474000) libpthread.so.0 = /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0x7fde59258000) libutil.so.1 = /lib/libutil.so.1 (0x7fde59054000) libncurses.so.5 = /lib/libncurses.so.5 (0x7fde58e0e000) libasound.so.2 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasound.so.2 (0x7fde58b1b000) libpng12.so.0 = /lib/libpng12.so.0 (0x7fde588f4000) libjpeg.so.8 = /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.8 (0x7fde586ba000) libsasl2.so.2 = /usr/lib/libsasl2.so.2 (0x7fde584a1000) libSDL-1.2.so.0 = /usr/lib/libSDL-1.2.so.0 (0x7fde581e60 libX11.so.6 = /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0x7fde57eab000) libspice-server.so.1 = /usr/local/lib/libspice-server.so.1 ( libpixman-1.so.0 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so. libcelt051.so.0 = /usr/local/lib/libcelt051.so.0 (0x7fde libm.so.6 = /lib/libm.so.6 (0x7fde574c4000) libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssl.so.1.0.0 libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcrypto.so. libz.so.1 = /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0x7fde56c94000) libc.so.6 = /lib/libc.so.6 (0x7fde56932000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7fde5968e000) libdl.so.2 = /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x7fde5672e000) libresolv.so.2 = /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x7fde56518000) libdirectfb-1.2.so.9 = /usr/lib/libdirectfb-1.2.so.9 (0x libfusion-1.2.so.9 = /usr/lib/libfusion-1.2.so.9 (0x7fde libdirect-1.2.so.9 = /usr/lib/libdirect-1.2.so.9 (0x7fde libvga.so.1 = /usr/lib/libvga.so.1 (0x7fde55c15000) libxcb.so.1 = /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0x7fde559f9000) libssl.so.0.9.8 = /usr/lib/libssl.so.0.9.8 (0x7fde557a40 libcrypto.so.0.9.8 = /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.0.9.8 (0x7fde libx86.so.1 = /lib/libx86.so.1 (0x7fde551e) libXau.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXau.so.6 (0x7fde54fdc000) libXdmcp.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x7fde54dd7000) En miPC root@trujo:/usr/local/bin# ldd qemu-spice linux-vdso.so.1 = (0x7fff341ff000) librt.so.1 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/librt.so.1 (0x7f58e7a9d000) libpthread.so.0 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 (0x7f58e7881000) libutil.so.1 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libutil.so.1 (0x7f58e767d000) libncurses.so.5 = /lib/libncurses.so.5 (0x7f58e7436000) libasound.so.2 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libasound.so.2 (0x7f58e7143000) libpng12.so.0 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpng12.so.0 (0x7f58e6f1c000) libjpeg.so.8 = /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.8 (0x7f58e6ce2000) libsasl2.so.2 = /usr/lib/libsasl2.so.2 (0x7f58e6ac7000) libSDL-1.2.so.0 = /usr/lib/libSDL-1.2.so.0 (0x7f58e6828000) libX11.so.6 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libX11.so.6 (0x7f58e64e9000) libspice-server.so.1 = /usr/lib/libspice-server.so.1 (0x7f58e6201000) libpixman-1.so.0 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpixman-1.so.0 (0x7f58e5f8c000) libcelt051.so.0 = /usr/lib/libcelt051.so.0 (0x7f58e5d7d000) libm.so.6 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x7f58e5afb000) libssl.so.1.0.0 = /usr/lib/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x7f58e58a8000) libcrypto.so.1.0.0 = /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x7f58e54e2000) libz.so.1 = /usr/lib/libz.so.1 (0x7f58e52cb000) libc.so.6 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x7f58e4f46000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x7f58e7cc6000) libdl.so.2 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x7f58e4d42000) libresolv.so.2 = /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libresolv.so.2 (0x7f58e4b2b000) libpulse-simple.so.0 = /usr/lib/libpulse-simple.so.0 (0x7f58e4927000) libpulse.so.0 = /usr/lib/libpulse.so.0 (0x7f58e46e4000) libXext.so.6 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libXext.so.6 (0x7f58e44d) libdirectfb-1.2.so.9 =
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
Gracias a todos: El 17/09/11 13:09, � escribió: ¿Se trata en ambos casos de la misma versión del paquete? .../... No mire de demasiado la lista, pero a primera vista tenes seguro que los dos GNU son 64bit? El 18/09/11 15:34, Camaleón escribió: Por eso le preguntaba si los paquetes instalados son la misma versión: uno parece instalado en un equipo con wheezy (PC) y otro parece instalado en un equipo con squeeze (Server) y paquetes de versiones distintas pueden tener distintos requerimientos en cuanto a las bibliotecas. Las dos distribuciones son debian instaladas con squeeze (estable) y puesto en el apt.conf como versión preferida, pero con las rutas a wheezy (pruebas) por necesidad de algunas dependencias, creo que el PC estará mas contaminado de wheezy pues, como es natural, en el hago muchas pruebas. Lo que si que es diferente (y ya lo dije es que mi PC es un amd64 y el servidor es pentium-VMT (en los proliant viene desactivada por defecto. En cuanto al paquete qemu no es debian (por eso puse el OT) si no que es un compilado en el PC y copiado con scp el ejecutable (luego es el mismo. Realmente el paquete funciona, pero parece ir mejor en el PC que en el servidor, quizas en la compilación, cuando instale el apt-build me lo optimizo para el AMD64 y ahora, aunque funciona, no funciona la virtualización Hardware (kvm). -- Por favor, NO utilice formatos de archivo propietarios para el intercambio de documentos, como DOC y XLS, sino HTML, RTF, TXT, CSV o cualquier otro que no obligue a utilizar un programa de un fabricante concreto para tratar la información contenida en él. SALUD. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e76dfed.5010...@juntadeandalucia.es
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
El Mon, 19 Sep 2011 08:23:41 +0200, Trujillo Carmona, Antonio escribió: Gracias a todos: El 17/09/11 13:09, � escribió: ¿Se trata en ambos casos de la misma versión del paquete? .../... No mire de demasiado la lista, pero a primera vista tenes seguro que los dos GNU son 64bit? El 18/09/11 15:34, Camaleón escribió: Por eso le preguntaba si los paquetes instalados son la misma versión: uno parece instalado en un equipo con wheezy (PC) y otro parece instalado en un equipo con squeeze (Server) y paquetes de versiones distintas pueden tener distintos requerimientos en cuanto a las bibliotecas. Las dos distribuciones son debian instaladas con squeeze (estable) y puesto en el apt.conf como versión preferida, pero con las rutas a wheezy (pruebas) por necesidad de algunas dependencias, creo que el PC estará mas contaminado de wheezy pues, como es natural, en el hago muchas pruebas. Lo que si que es diferente (y ya lo dije es que mi PC es un amd64 y el servidor es pentium-VMT (en los proliant viene desactivada por defecto. Eso puede explicar la diferencia de la rutas a las bibliotecas. En cuanto al paquete qemu no es debian (por eso puse el OT) si no que es un compilado en el PC y copiado con scp el ejecutable (luego es el mismo. Realmente el paquete funciona, pero parece ir mejor en el PC que en el servidor, quizas en la compilación, cuando instale el apt-build me lo optimizo para el AMD64 y ahora, aunque funciona, no funciona la virtualización Hardware (kvm). El binario es el mismo pero compilado en otro equipo por lo que te habrá utilizado las bibliotecas que haya encontrado en el equipo PC (aunque eso ya dependerá de los parámetros que le pasaras al compilar). Si en el servidor no tienes instalado, por ejemplo, paquetes multimedia, no podrá cargar esas bibliotecas compartidas porque no existen en ese equipo ¿no? :-? Saludos, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.19.10.40...@gmail.com
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
El Sat, 17 Sep 2011 08:55:29 -0300, Flako escribió: Las liberias creo que las busca segun el /etc/ld.so.conf No mire de demasiado la lista, pero a primera vista tenes seguro que los dos GNU son 64bit? Porque en tu pc parece no encontrar los de 64bit y si en el servier, por ejemplo: Server libXdmcp.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x7fde54dd7000) Tu PC libXdmcp.so.6 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libXdmcp.so.6 en man ldconfig debe estar lo que buscas. sm01@stt008:~$ locate libXdmcp.so.6 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0 sm01@stt008:~$ file /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6: symbolic link to `libXdmcp.so.6.0.0' sm01@stt008:~$ file /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0 /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6.0.0: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, stripped sm01@stt008:~$ uname -r 2.6.26-2-amd64 Yo estoy con una lenny de 64 bits y la ruta de esa biblioteca es /usr/ lib :-) Por eso le preguntaba si los paquetes instalados son la misma versión: uno parece instalado en un equipo con wheezy (PC) y otro parece instalado en un equipo con squeeze (Server) y paquetes de versiones distintas pueden tener distintos requerimientos en cuanto a las bibliotecas. Saludos, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.18.13.34...@gmail.com
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
El Fri, 16 Sep 2011 21:28:28 +0200, Trujillo Carmona, Antonio escribió: (...) Instale las que faltaba y esta funcionando, pero mi gran solpresa y por lo que consulta es la diferencia que hay en la salida del ldd en una maquina y otra, ¿es que un programa, después de compilado, puede decidir usar unas librerías o no?, he probalo a instalar alguna de las que no usa y sigue sin usarla. (...) ¿Se trata en ambos casos de la misma versión del paquete? Saludos, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.17.11.09...@gmail.com
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
Las liberias creo que las busca segun el /etc/ld.so.conf No mire de demasiado la lista, pero a primera vista tenes seguro que los dos GNU son 64bit? Porque en tu pc parece no encontrar los de 64bit y si en el servier, por ejemplo: Server libXdmcp.so.6 = /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0x7fde54dd7000) Tu PC libXdmcp.so.6 = /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libXdmcp.so.6 en man ldconfig debe estar lo que buscas. Saludos. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/cadqxbrtc-to6usi15pemw0tnu1emzz90s4rm0qousqbiy1b...@mail.gmail.com
Re: OT ldd con diferentes salidas
El día 17 de septiembre de 2011 08:55, Flako subfo...@gmail.com escribió: Porque en tu pc parece no encontrar los de 64bit y si en el servier, Leer lo que dice Porque el servidor parece no encontrar los de 64bit y si tu pc :) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-spanish-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CADqxbRRFn11iQ_F7DzNf0mBqFTbnvLUKpLeXvucRyD=r2er...@mail.gmail.com
Re: missing LDD in Linux
Gregory T. Norris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/bin/ldd is one of the dynamic-linker utilities, and is provided by the ldso package. It definately ought to be present... I'd suggesr reinstalling ldso. hmm... ok i am a newbie, how do i do that? or can i just copy ldd from someone else his system (debian off course)? thx B
Re: missing LDD in Linux
I'd probably just snarf the package off the Debian website. Go to http://www.debian.org/Packages/stable/base/ldso.html, and you should be given the option of downloading the debfile. Once completed, do ``dpkg -i ldso*.deb'' (as root). Note: I'm assuming that you're running the stable branch (2.1, codenamed ``slink'') of Debian, and not the pre-release of unstable (``potato''). The URL listed above is slightly different in the latter case. On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 05:57:51PM +0200, Puam wrote: Gregory T. Norris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/bin/ldd is one of the dynamic-linker utilities, and is provided by the ldso package. It definately ought to be present... I'd suggesr reinstalling ldso. hmm... ok i am a newbie, how do i do that? or can i just copy ldd from someone else his system (debian off course)?
Re: missing LDD in Linux
/usr/bin/ldd is one of the dynamic-linker utilities, and is provided by the ldso package. It definately ought to be present... I'd suggesr reinstalling ldso. On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 11:18:59PM +0200, Bruno Van de Casteele wrote: hi, while compiling my kernel (and pine, but that's smth else), i get an error, saying missing ldd or smth like that (should be in usr/bin/ ?) what is ldd? it isnt a package in Debian, i think... is it smth special?
Re: missing ldd - SOLVED
On Mon, May 24, 1999 at 10:49:23PM +0200, Ingo Hohmann wrote: ... As ldd seems not to be installed, which package provides it? ... OK, I found it now, it was in the ldso package, I reinstalled it, et voila! I still have no clue, why it hasn't been installed the first time around. thanks to all Ingo -- Ingo Hohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing ldd
Subject: Re: missing ldd Date: Tue, May 25, 1999 at 10:24:39PM +0200 In reply to:Ingo Hohmann Quoting Ingo Hohmann([EMAIL PROTECTED]): in reply to both messages ... On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 01:46:36AM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote: ... As ldd seems not to be installed, which package provides it? Try dpgg -S ldd I've tried it: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ingo dpkg -S ldd ldso: /usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz tetex-base: /usr/lib/texmf/fonts/source/public/cm/olddig.mf ldso: /usr/lib/lddstub debhelper: /usr/man/man1/dh_builddeb.1.gz debhelper: /usr/bin/dh_builddeb I have libc6 Version: 2.0.7.19981211-6 libc6-dev is also installed. So? I don't understand. Do you have ldso installed or not? libc6 doesn't provide ldd, ldso does. Am I missing something in your question??? Package: ldso Version: 1.9.10-1 Priority: required Description: The Linux dynamic linker, library and utilities. The dynamic linker provides the user-level support for loading and linking DLL and ELF shared libraries. It is required by any program that uses shared libraries. . WARNING: Do NOT downgrade this package to version 1.8.x or earlier. Doing so may leave your system in an unusable state. installed-size: 371 source: ld.so ... -- Ingo Hohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null -- You have a tendency to feel you are superior to most computers ___ Wayne T. Topa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing ldd
On Tue, 25 May 1999, Wayne Topa wrote: So? I don't understand. Do you have ldso installed or not? libc6 doesn't provide ldd, ldso does. In potato, libc6 does. Apparently ldso does in slink.
Re: missing ldd
Subject: Re: missing ldd Date: Wed, May 26, 1999 at 12:07:37AM -0500 In reply to:Brad Quoting Brad([EMAIL PROTECTED]): On Tue, 25 May 1999, Wayne Topa wrote: So? I don't understand. Do you have ldso installed or not? libc6 doesn't provide ldd, ldso does. In potato, libc6 does. Apparently ldso does in slink. Ahh, I guess I didn't take enough mind reading courses. I guess I shouldn't answer questions that don't include enough info. That might not bea a bad idea. Most of the requests are for info that is available on the system anyway. Thanks Brad, I have a potato partition but his question didn't even make me think of that. Oh well, I tried. Wayne -- Information Center, n.: A room staffed by professional computer people whose job it is to tell you why you cannot have the information you require. ___ Wayne T. Topa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing ldd
On 26-May-99 Brad wrote: On Tue, 25 May 1999, Wayne Topa wrote: So? I don't understand. Do you have ldso installed or not? libc6 doesn't provide ldd, ldso does. In potato, libc6 does. Apparently ldso does in slink. Yes, that is what I recall. On my system, 'dpkg -S ldd' says that ldd came from libc6 but I recall when I used Slink, I had to reinstall ldso to get ldd back. -- Andrew
Re: missing ldd
On Wed, May 26, 1999 at 01:14:47AM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote: Subject: Re: missing ldd Date: Wed, May 26, 1999 at 12:07:37AM -0500 In reply to:Brad Quoting Brad([EMAIL PROTECTED]): On Tue, 25 May 1999, Wayne Topa wrote: So? I don't understand. Do you have ldso installed or not? libc6 doesn't provide ldd, ldso does. In potato, libc6 does. Apparently ldso does in slink. Ahh, I guess I didn't take enough mind reading courses. ... Sorry, this was my fault then, but to me it was perfectly clear what system I use. Hmmm, maybe I should try to think before I write. Anyway, I've got - Debian/Gnu Linux 2.1 - Kernel 2.2.4 - Package: ldso Version: 1.9.10-1 - Package: libc6 Version: 2.0.7.19981211-6 - Package: libc6-dev Version: 2.0.7.19981211-6 (have I forgotten anything?) I've got not - ldd the only entries resembling are /usr/lib/lddstub /usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz which are installed by ldso (dpkg -L ldso) Time to reget and reinstall??? Ingo -- Ingo Hohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: missing ldd
On 24-May-99 Ingo Hohmann wrote: When I run debian/rules binary in the gnurobots source dir, it exits with: dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: cannot exec ldd: No such file or directory dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/tmp/usr/games/grobots' gave error exit status 2 dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 As ldd seems not to be installed, which package provides it? I believe it is libc6. I have libc6 version 2.1.x and it provided ldd. -- Andrew
Re: missing ldd
Subject: missing ldd Date: Mon, May 24, 1999 at 10:49:23PM +0200 In reply to:Ingo Hohmann Quoting Ingo Hohmann([EMAIL PROTECTED]): When I run debian/rules binary in the gnurobots source dir, it exits with: dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: cannot exec ldd: No such file or directory dpkg-shlibdeps: failure: ldd on `debian/tmp/usr/games/grobots' gave error exit status 2 dh_shlibdeps: command returned error code make: *** [binary-arch] Error 1 As ldd seems not to be installed, which package provides it? Try dpgg -S ldd -- Just about every computer on the market today runs Unix, except the Mac (and nobody cares about it). -- Bill Joy 6/21/85 ___ Wayne T. Topa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: missing ldd
in reply to both messages ... On Tue, May 25, 1999 at 01:46:36AM -0400, Wayne Topa wrote: ... As ldd seems not to be installed, which package provides it? Try dpgg -S ldd I've tried it: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ingo dpkg -S ldd ldso: /usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz tetex-base: /usr/lib/texmf/fonts/source/public/cm/olddig.mf ldso: /usr/lib/lddstub debhelper: /usr/man/man1/dh_builddeb.1.gz debhelper: /usr/bin/dh_builddeb I have libc6 Version: 2.0.7.19981211-6 libc6-dev is also installed. ... -- Ingo Hohmann [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: did ldd disappear?
Stuart Marshall [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Sorry to answer myself but I re-installed ldso (1.9.10-1) and ldd is back. Don't know what happened. /usr/doc/libc6/changelog.Debian.gz: glibc (2.0.7.19981211-2) frozen unstable; urgency=low * Get ldd out of the libc6 package on architectures with libc5. * It may be necessary to reinstall ldso to get ldd back. -- Joel Klecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun, 17 Jan 1999 04:03:37 -0800 Hope this answers your question. Torsten -- Homepage: http://www.in-berlin.de/User/myrkr
Re: did ldd disappear?
Hi, Sorry to answer myself but I re-installed ldso (1.9.10-1) and ldd is back. Don't know what happened. Stuart
Re: Missing ldd? Have libc6 on hold? Get ldso from slink...
On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 04:57:05PM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote: The solution is to downgrade the ldso package to the one in slink, or actually take the plunge to glibc 2.1. so what's likely to break if i upgrade to glibc 2.1? will i still be left with a (mostly) usable system? (i'm willing to test it but not if my machine is going to be die) craig -- craig sanders
Re: Missing ldd? Have libc6 on hold? Get ldso from slink...
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 02:44:51PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: The solution is to downgrade the ldso package to the one in slink, or actually take the plunge to glibc 2.1. so what's likely to break if i upgrade to glibc 2.1? will i still be left with a (mostly) usable system? (i'm willing to test it but not if my machine is going to be die) Make sure your mirror is up to date. libtricks will break--use fakeroot 0.17.2 or something most things like sshd and the like will need restarting apt 0.1.10 will break--use apt 0.1.10.1 libgc4 breaks prcs breaks jdk breaks I'm told uhh, there was a list on #debian in the topic, someone removed it. -- Joseph Carter [EMAIL PROTECTED]Debian GNU/Linux developer PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBEThe Source Comes First! - lux if macOS is for the computer illiterate, then windoze is for the computer masochists pgp7N5PPazaL0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Missing ldd? Have libc6 on hold? Get ldso from slink...
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 02:44:51PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 04:57:05PM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote: The solution is to downgrade the ldso package to the one in slink, or actually take the plunge to glibc 2.1. so what's likely to break if i upgrade to glibc 2.1? will i still be left with a (mostly) usable system? My machine survived long enough for me to force-downgrade to the previous version of ldso, and put it on hold. -- G. Branden Robinson | There is no gravity in space. Debian GNU/Linux | Then how could astronauts walk around [EMAIL PROTECTED] | on the Moon? cartoon.ecn.purdue.edu/~branden/ | Because they were wearing heavy boots. pgp4PUNv2Pg0U.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Missing ldd? Have libc6 on hold? Get ldso from slink...
On Mon, Mar 15, 1999 at 02:44:51PM +1100, Craig Sanders wrote: On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 04:57:05PM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote: The solution is to downgrade the ldso package to the one in slink, or actually take the plunge to glibc 2.1. so what's likely to break if i upgrade to glibc 2.1? will i still be left with a (mostly) usable system? (i'm willing to test it but not if my machine is going to be die) craig -- craig sanders Well, I just 'took the plunge' and everything SEEMS to be working... Mike with fingers crossed -- Mike Merten [EMAIL PROTECTED] ICQ# 28460680
Re: No ldd?
Morgan Fletcher [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have no ldd executable. Please look at the `libc6' changelog.Debian. If it mentions that `ldso' needs to be re-installed, that is your problem. I think the `libc6' package provided the `ldd' binary for a short time. The fix is to re-fetch ldso*.deb and install it. - Hari -- Raja R Harinath -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] When all else fails, read the instructions. -- Cahn's Axiom Our policy is, when in doubt, do the right thing. -- Roy L Ash
Re: No ldd?
Remco van de Meent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I'd say reinstall the package, maybe went wrong during installation ? This is really strange.. Debian doesn't let you uninstall base packages like libc6 or ldso, and I don't see a way to force a re-installation of an installed package. I wonder if the postinst script can somehow be re-run. morgan -- V M o r g a n F l e t c h e r http://www.hahaha.org Tibi gratias agimus quod nihil fumas. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: No ldd?
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 11:05:34AM -0800, Morgan Fletcher wrote: [...] !search ldd dpkg potstickr: behold, ldd is in this package: base/libc6,base/ldso +(/usr/bin/ldd) But neither of those packages, as installed on my system, contain ldd: $ dpkg -L ldso libc6 | grep -i ldd /usr/lib/lddstub /usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz File: changelog.debian.gz glibc (2.0.7.19981211-2) frozen unstable; urgency=low * Get ldd out of the libc6 package on architectures with libc5. * It may be necessary to reinstall ldso to get ldd back. ^^^ ii ldso1.9.10-1 The Linux dynamic linker, library and utilit ii libc6 2.0.7.19981211 GNU Libc: shared libraries I reeinstalled ldso and problemn went away Mirek
Re: No ldd?
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 04:50:04PM -0800, George Bonser wrote: : I just got a DIFFERENT copy of ldso and this one included ld. There is a : bad .deb going around someplace. Apparently. I just checked the ldso package on the master site (ftp.debian.org), and that one appears to be okay. But it remains strange, according to the logs, there has been just one version of ldso installed in the archives. Anyways, if people still have problems with the missing ldd, get the package from ftp.debian.org and dpkg -i it. bye, -Remco
Re: No ldd?
On Wed, Jan 20, 1999 at 11:05:34AM -0800, Morgan Fletcher wrote: : But neither of those packages, as installed on my system, contain ldd: : : $ dpkg -L ldso libc6 | grep -i ldd : /usr/lib/lddstub : /usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz That's kinda strange. I assume, you mean with `current' the current slink distribution. $ dpkg -c dists/slink/main/binary-i386/base/ldso_1.9.10-1.deb | grep ldd -rwxr-xr-x root/root100520 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/bin/ldd -rwxr-xr-x root/root 1776 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/lib/lddstub -rw-r--r-- root/root 786 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz Do you have ldso version 1.9.10-1 installed on your system ? bye, -Remco
Re: No ldd?
Remco van de Meent [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: That's kinda strange. I assume, you mean with `current' the current slink distribution. Yeah. astroman:/etc# cat /etc/debian_version 2.1 astroman:/etc# (apt-get update ; apt-get upgrade) 21 | grep upgrade 0 packages upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. $ dpkg -c dists/slink/main/binary-i386/base/ldso_1.9.10-1.deb | grep ldd -rwxr-xr-x root/root100520 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/bin/ldd -rwxr-xr-x root/root 1776 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/lib/lddstub -rw-r--r-- root/root 786 1999-01-14 04:23 usr/man/man1/ldd.1.gz Do you have ldso version 1.9.10-1 installed on your system ? Yep. astroman:/etc# dpkg -l ldso | grep ldso ii ldso1.9.10-1 The Linux dynamic linker, library and Thanks for the quick response. I appreciate your help! morgan -- V M o r g a n F l e t c h e r http://www.hahaha.org Tibi gratias agimus quod nihil fumas. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
