On Mit, 2002-10-02 at 11:13, José Fonseca wrote: > On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 04:25:21PM -0700, Russ Dill wrote: > >> > > I just uploaded a set of binary snapshots built from the CVS head > >> > > using RedHat's compat-gcc-7.3-2.96.110 package (which produces > >> > > code compatible with the gcc bundled with the RedHat 7.3 and is > >> > > the same which was producing the snapshots before). > >> > > >> > Unfortunately this appears to be not very helpful for those of us > >> > who test-run the snapshots on a regular basis against known OpenGL > >> > programs. This is from the radeon-20020930 binary snapshot: > >> > > >> > libGL: OpenDriver: trying /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/radeon_dri.so > >> > libGL error: dlopen failed: /lib/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.3' not > >> > found (required by > >> > /usr/X11R6/lib/modules/dri/radeon_dri.so) > >> > > >> > _I_ don't have glibc-2.3 on my system and I believe, others don't > >> > either. So this _might_ render the binary snapshots pretty useless. > > > >> But so the 2D driver from that snapshot works for you? > > > >Its c code, so I don't think the version of gcc is that important, what > >matters is the GLIBC_2.3 symbol, it doesn't show up in the X driver, > >because it isn't linked against libc, however, the dri portion is. > > > >For some bizzare reason, redhat has decided to put a cvs version of > >glibc in their upcoming distro release, which you are aparently > >compiling against, the current release version of glibc is 2.2.5, more > >than 90% of users are probably using this version. > > This still doesn't make sense to me. So isn't glic-2.3 backwards > compatible?
Sure, but glibc 2.2 isn't forward compatible. > I've been using quite alot of RHL 7.2 compiled programs with > the new version and had no problems whatsoever. So why do the DRI > drivers require specifically version 2.3? Because they're built against that. > Perhaps this is a pickyness of XFree86 module loader. No, it's not even involved. > >*please* find a machine with a copy of glibc2.2, wait until glibc2.3 > >actually becomes a release to compile against it (or, if in the case of > >redhat, distribute it with your distro) > > The final RHL 8.0 was released 2 days ago. I'll upgrade soon but I > already checked and it has the same version of gcc. Please note that > the snapshots are done on workstation in the nigth, and I needed to > upgrade for several reasons regarding my work. I have no other machine > powerfull enough to do all these snapshots. > > What I'll do is install a older version of Gentoo in a chroot'ed > environment to compile the snapshots using gcc-2.95.3 and glibc-2.2.5 for > the _time being_. > > But I see rough times ahead for the binary snapshots. I surely can't make > one for each system out there. And if the others distros don't also > upgrade to glic-2.3 then I think the best is to completely stop the > snapshots builds and replace them with a nice set of scripts which > people can use to make their own customized snapshot. You don't need to build for every system, just against an older version of glibc. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
