Re: Is a binary with this libraries portable

On 28 Feb., 12:14, John Reiser <jrei...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

For me it looks like all this should be available on recent Linux

Not everybody runs a recent Linux version. For instance, there are still
many installations of Red Hat Enterprise Linux version 4 [also CentOS4.]
It is only three years old. It still has 3 months of Full Support,
8 months of Deployment Support, and 4 years of Maintenance Support.

Well but what is the current state for Desktop users?

I'm compiling on Ubunto 6.06 Dapper Drake. I think this should be old
enough for most desktop users.

At least for them who consider purchasing binary Software. I don't
about the others.

The functional capabilities for which libXrandr was designed
are missing from the majority of existing VGA chips/cards and displays.

Yes. I found out in the meantime that it is best to link statically
against it.
It only depends on libXrender and hopefully the GUI toolkit (i have to
look at this)
will handle a non working libXrandr gracefully.

Many installations lack the libraries and

I used readelf (thanks for the hint) to read what i'm using and this
is only:

0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: []
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: []
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: []
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: []
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library:
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [
0x00000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: []

Luckily all libs are part of the LSB 3.2 Desktop standard. freetype is
using expat and
Xrender needs Xau. So that's not my responsibility.

Run "readelf --version-info <executable_program>" to see which GLIBC_* versions
your executables expect. Greater than GLIBC_2.3.2 probably will force you
to distribute and the other pieces of glibc-2.x.y.

How can i find out about this. I have to say that MSDN is giving very
good information
about what function is available on what Version. I really miss any
kind of information
about this in the man pages.
As far as know i'm only using posix and bsd functions. But i guess i
need a good
runtime checker. Unfortunately the LSB checker for Ubuntu does not
work and there
is none for 3.2 prepackaged. Well 6.06 is far from being LSB compliant

You must distribute "private" libraries, and tell the runtime linker
to use them, if you wish to support at least 75% of existing installations.

No. I will never again distribute any private "pthread" or "glibc"
libraries. You only run
into a complete nightmare. My last try was with Mandriva, Red Hat
Fedora 3 and Suse 9.x
and had such terrible results that i was really really disappointed
and stopped working on
the Linux version for a few years.

This is not possible and thats also why LSB forbids to link to any of
the core libraries
statically or do bundle them and also forbids static compiled

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Novell aquired SuSE
    ... > that they were going to release the next version of netware on linux. ... non-commercial Fedora project is a good thing for Red Hat which, IMO, ... Just like the news that Novell bought ... about dropping RH7, 8, and 9 support is not news. ...
  • Re: [SLE] Redhat vs SuSE Debate
    ... Fedora Linux is the equivalent of Red Hat Linux, ... > always been targeted at small customers with lower support needs. ... >> considering SuSE. ...
  • Re: How Intel Can Save the Itanium!
    ... David probably meant IBM pSeries/p5) and Itanium Linux installations ... Leading Itanium vendors, i.e. HP, Fujitsu and SGI officially support ... Red Hat and SUSE as OS options for their hardware. ...
  • Re: learning Common Lisp ;; i came back Full-Circle (OT)
    ... Linux comes from Free Software Movement, GNU, carrying the License ... Since you love to mention Red hat model it's not bad idea to also ... (RHEL), but Red Hat is careful to also nurture the development ... Red Hat ties support to its software - you cannot get and run the RHEL ...
  • Re: "Torn between two OS" - Solaris vs Linux
    ... > certified for use on Red Hat? ... So that the vendor's support folks only have to be familiar with Red ... It doesn't mean that the software won't work on another Linux ... versions of RH Enterprise Linux are based on the 2.4.21 kernel), ...