On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 21:43:06 +0100, Ernest jw ter Kuile wrote:
> On Friday 18 March 2005 21:15, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> > It should probably say "is a static executable". That would be more clear.
> >
>
> Not necesserally, it could be anything else too. it could be a script, a
> picture, a device, e
On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 21:07 +0100, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> First I tried to use pptp from alioth, but that did not work, so as a
> last resort I tried to run the 32bit versions and voila! They worked!
Definitely check your PPTP settings. If you want the best encryption and
compression, you'll have t
On Friday 18 March 2005 21:15, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> It should probably say "is a static executable". That would be more clear.
>
Not necesserally, it could be anything else too. it could be a script, a
picture, a device, etc ..., or a static excecutable.
ldd had only one error for all files it
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 21:06:53 +0100, Ernest jw ter Kuile
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > not a dynamic executable
>
> Indeed: Static
>
> ;o)
Thanks Ernest!
The message is a bit confusing. At least I was confused, since it said
it is "not a ... executable". It should probably say "is a sta
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 14:51:57 -0500, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:36:26PM +0100, Hannes Mayer wrote:
[...]
> > # ldd pppd
> > /usr/bin/ldd: line 145: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: No such file or directory
> > ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown exit code (127)
>
> That means
> not a dynamic executable
Indeed: Static
;o)
Ernest.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, Mar 18, 2005 at 08:36:26PM +0100, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:20:08 -0600, Stephen Waters wrote:
> > On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 20:15 +0100, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> [...]
> > > How come that 32bit binaries run on pure64 without any chroot or the
>
On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 13:20:08 -0600, Stephen Waters wrote:
> On Fri, 2005-03-18 at 20:15 +0100, Hannes Mayer wrote:
[...]
> > How come that 32bit binaries run on pure64 without any chroot or the
> > ia32 libs installed ?
>
> They're probably statically compiled so they&
On Friday 18 March 2005 20:15, Hannes Mayer wrote:
> How come that 32bit binaries run on pure64 without any chroot or the
> ia32 libs installed ?
They are probably statically linked.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble
(32bit) but surprisingly enough those
> binaries also work on pure64!
>
> How come that 32bit binaries run on pure64 without any chroot or the
> ia32 libs installed ?
>
> Note: No ia32 libs installed:
> # dpkg -l ia32\*
Well dhcpcd and pppd certainly exist in debian p
come that 32bit binaries run on pure64 without any chroot or the
ia32 libs installed ?
Note: No ia32 libs installed:
# dpkg -l ia32\*
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both
11 matches
Mail list logo
