Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: Paul Pluzhnikov <ppluzhnikov-nsp@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2005 21:23:30 -0800
Denes Molnar <molnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> i) could the program or the Fedora libraries require 2.6 kernels?
The sole version of libc.so.6 on my FC4 system requires 2.4.20
kernel:
$ objdump -sj.note.ABI-tag /lib/libc.so.6
/lib/libc.so.6: file format elf32-i386
Contents of section .note.ABI-tag:
8ec174 04000000 10000000 01000000 474e5500 ............GNU.
8ec184 00000000 02000000 04000000 14000000 ................
[The last 3 numbers signify required kernel version:
0x02 0x04 0x14 == 2.4.20]
If you had a "kernel too old" situation, the exe would just
always fail with "error while loading shared libraries" loader
message.
> ii) could it be that I need additional data files for libc 2.3?
That is most likely cause of your troubles: you've only copied
libraries listed in ldd output, but there are probably other
libraries loaded dynamically by glibc itself.
Either copy all libraries listed by 'rpm -ql glibc' on FC4, or run
Mathematica on FC4 and examine /proc/<mathematica-pid>/maps
This will probably reveal additional libraries you must copy
but didn't.
> But what about locale files?
I've never had problems with mismatched locale/ files (but I don't
usually deal with i18n software).
If these are in fact causing failure, I expect that setting a whole
new chroot'ed environment might be easiest solution.
> iii) it appears that Mathematica would communicate with its kernel
> process through some special files in /tmp (named pipes?, if I am
> guessing right). Could such inter-process communication be affected by
> locale settings, or kernel version??
Unlikely.
Cheers,
--
In order to understand recursion you must first understand recursion.
Remove /-nsp/ for email.
.
- References:
- glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- From: Denes Molnar
- glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Prev by Date: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Next by Date: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Previous by thread: Re: glibc 2.2 vs 2.3 issue back again
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|