Hi,

I once rebuilt tidy for the PSI SL4 repository.
The rpms should be "arch clean". Maybe they are useful for somebody.

http://linux.web.psi.ch/dist/scientific/4/psi/current/tidy-2005.9.21-2.slp4.src.rpm

http://linux.web.psi.ch/dist/scientific/4/psi/current/tidy-2005.9.21-2.slp4.i386.rpm
http://linux.web.psi.ch/dist/scientific/4/psi/current/tidy-devel-2005.9.21-2.slp4.i386.rpm

http://linux.web.psi.ch/dist/scientific/4/psi/current/tidy-2005.9.21-2.slp4.x86_64.rpm
http://linux.web.psi.ch/dist/scientific/4/psi/current/tidy-devel-2005.9.21-2.slp4.x86_64.rpm


Urs






Troy Dawson wrote:
Vrijaldenhoven, Serge wrote:
Hi,

during generation of OS group templates for quattor, we found package tidy to give some error.

Features collected in /tmp/rpmProvides.out.28995
Building RPM list with their requirements. May take a while (15-30 minutes)...
WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6
          Available archs for libc.so.6 : i686
WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
          Available archs for libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) : i686
WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
          Available archs for libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) : i686
RPM requirements collected in /tmp/rpmRequires.out.28995


What seems to be the problem is that the tidy package is a 32 bit application, while having x86_64 in it's name: tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
Although it looks 64bit:
rpm -q --queryformat "%{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n" -p ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm warning: ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2
  tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64
We think it's 32 bit.


1. It requires 32bit libraries
$rpm -q --requires -p ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
warning: ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2
  libc.so.6
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
  rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1

(64bit applications list '(64bit)' behind the dependencies)
$rpm -q --requires -p zip-2.3-27.x86_64.rpm
warning: zip-2.3-27.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID a7048f8d
  libc.so.6()(64bit)
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
  libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
  rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
  rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1


2. After installing, it looks like a 32bit application
$rpm -ivh tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
warning: tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2 Preparing... ########################################### [100%] 1:tidy ########################################### [100%]
$file /usr/bin/tidy
/usr/bin/tidy: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.0.30, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
$ldd /usr/bin/tidy
        linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00325000)
        /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x0030b000)


Greetings,
        Serge

Interesting ... and it looks like it run's, because for some reason, something else it pulling in the 32 bit glibc. Actually, as I try to pull the 32 bit glibc out ... it's pulling out a *huge* list of things, but they are all marked i386 or i686. I'll look into it, but it's going to be quite low on my priority list, if someone else wants to see about recompiling it to that it really is x86_64. See if there was some setting I missed.

Troy

Reply via email to