Hi Jon, Am Mittwoch, den 16.06.2021, 08:05 -0400 schrieb Jon Ringle: > Am Dienstag, den 15.06.2021, 16:18 +0200 schrieb Michael Olbrich: > > > […] > > > I'm not sure why it would be looking for GLIBC_2.29 > > > > It seems the used binary libm was linked against a newer version of libc. > > > > Can you please send the output of > > > > $ readelf -a > > /src/build/platform-ec1k/sysroot-host/lib/libpython3.7m.so.1.0 > > > > and > > > > $ readelf -a /path/to/the/used/libm.so > > > > > jringle@-arm-v5te-linux-gnueabi:~$ cat /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so > /* GNU ld script > */ > OUTPUT_FORMAT(elf64-x86-64) > GROUP ( /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 AS_NEEDED ( > /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmvec_nonshared.a > /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libmvec.so.1 ) ) > > I will attach the output of > $ readelf -a /src/build/platform-ec1k/sysroot-host/lib/libpython3.7m.so.1.0 > and > $ readelf -a /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 > > as they are quite large.
Sure :-) Its quite confusing. Your 'libm' hasn't any dependency to GLIBC_2.29, but your 'libpython3.7m' has. I had expect these version dependency came in via the systems libm. Can you repeat the readelf command to your listed 'libmvec.so.1' and grep for the GLIBC_2.29 text? Something in this chain has exactly this dependency to GLIBC_2.29. Jürgen -- Pengutronix e.K. | Juergen Borleis | Steuerwalder Str. 21 | https://www.pengutronix.de/ | 31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-128 | Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-9 | _______________________________________________ ptxdist mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe, send a mail with subject "unsubscribe" to [email protected]
