RE: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Diego Luo （罗国雄）]

Hi, Jeff

Thanks for your reply.
I resolved this issue by upgrading the Raspbian OS from Bullseye to Bookworm.

Best Regards
Diego

-Original Message-
From: Jeffrey Walton  
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2024 9:27 PM
To: Diego Luo （罗国雄） 
Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

Caution: This email originated outside of Semtech.


On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 5:52 AM Diego Luo （罗国雄）  wrote:
>
> Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to 
> the specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?
>
> I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
> 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 
> GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.
>
> When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
> and GLIBC, with the details below.
>
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# 
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: 
> version `GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by 
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#

Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the build, rip 
out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol versioning does is to cause 
a DoS and frustrate users.

You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping for 
'.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.

Jeff

To view our privacy policy, including the types of personal information we 
collect, process and share, and the rights and options you have in this 
respect, see www.semtech.com/legal.

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Thomas Pircher]

Gremlin wrote:

The new OS called Raspberry Pi OS is a new animal.  The foundation
used raspian and the the Raspberry Pi OS is the foundations, developed
by the foundation.


Yet it is still based on Debian, according to their changelog
https://downloads.raspberrypi.com/raspios_arm64/release_notes.txt

| 2023-10-10:
|  * Based on Debian bookworm release

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[debian-user]

Gremlin  wrote:
> On 2/27/24 16:08, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:
> > Gremlin  wrote:
> >   
> >> The provider is raspberry foundation and Raspian has been
> >> dis-continued.  

> Nope that is just wrong.
> 
> https://www.raspbian.org/
[snip]
> Note: Raspbian is not affiliated with the Raspberry Pi Foundation.

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[gene heskett]

On 2/27/24 16:21, Gremlin wrote:

On 2/27/24 16:08, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:

Gremlin  wrote:


The provider is raspberry foundation and Raspian has been
dis-continued.


There is such a thing as the Raspberry Pi Foundation but they are an
educational charity. Pis are supplied by Raspberry Pi Ltd. Raspbian has
NOT been discontinued, it has simply been renamed Raspberry Pi OS. I
don't know who releases it, though it is released from teh Ltd company
website rather than the Foundation. Perhaps somebody else knows more
detail.




Nope that is just wrong.


https://www.raspbian.org/


Welcome to Raspbian

Raspbian is a free operating system based on Debian optimized for the 
Raspberry Pi hardware. An operating system is the set of basic programs 
and utilities that make your Raspberry Pi run. However, Raspbian 
provides more than a pure OS: it comes with over 35,000 packages, 
pre-compiled software bundled in a nice format for easy installation on 
your Raspberry Pi.


The initial build of over 35,000 Raspbian packages, optimized for best 
performance on the Raspberry Pi, was completed in June of 2012. However, 
Raspbian is still under active development with an emphasis on improving 
the stability and performance of as many Debian packages as possible.


Note: Raspbian is not affiliated with the Raspberry Pi Foundation. 
Raspbian was created by a small, dedicated team of developers that are 
fans of the Raspberry Pi hardware, the educational goals of the 
Raspberry Pi Foundation and, of course, the Debian Project.



Why are you trying to tell someone that has used raspberry pi since the 
original pi came out things that are just not true.


I also build custom OS for the raspberry pi platform and I am well 
versed with them. I have approx a dozen of them from rpi to rpi 5


I have used them for servers on the network including the original pi.

Yes I am aware of theis in the foundation page:

Your Raspberry Pi needs an operating system to work. This is it. 
Raspberry Pi OS (previously called Raspbian) is our official supported 
operating system.


The new OS called Raspberry Pi OS is a new animal.  The foundation used 
raspian and the the Raspberry Pi OS is the foundations, developed by the 
foundation.


Just one huge problem with all this, the NIH syndrome rules supreme as 
far as your forum is concerned, I asked about a realtime kernel 3 times 
so I could run linuxcnc on an rpi3b many years ago. Some body took 
umbrage and I have been blackholed from posting to the forum since, 
about 6 or 7 years ago. But I managed to get a realtime 4.19 built and 
ran it for quite sometime, 6 years, 2 on the rpi3b, now 4 years on a 4b. 
After I figured out how to install it. Uptimes in years from my method. 
The forum supports music video to the near exclusion of a heck of a lot 
of other stuff the pi can do. So when I got into 3d printers, it was on 
bananapi-m5's running armbian. Support by Igor and friends has been so 
good I throw a $20 bill in the armbian kitty every month. TANSTAAFL 
folks. Natures only 100% true law.


Cheers, Gene Heskett, CET.
--
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author, 1940)
If we desire respect for the law, we must first make the law respectable.
 - Louis D. Brandeis

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 16:08, debian-u...@howorth.org.uk wrote:

Gremlin  wrote:


The provider is raspberry foundation and Raspian has been
dis-continued.


There is such a thing as the Raspberry Pi Foundation but they are an
educational charity. Pis are supplied by Raspberry Pi Ltd. Raspbian has
NOT been discontinued, it has simply been renamed Raspberry Pi OS. I
don't know who releases it, though it is released from teh Ltd company
website rather than the Foundation. Perhaps somebody else knows more
detail.




Nope that is just wrong.


https://www.raspbian.org/


Welcome to Raspbian

Raspbian is a free operating system based on Debian optimized for the 
Raspberry Pi hardware. An operating system is the set of basic programs 
and utilities that make your Raspberry Pi run. However, Raspbian 
provides more than a pure OS: it comes with over 35,000 packages, 
pre-compiled software bundled in a nice format for easy installation on 
your Raspberry Pi.


The initial build of over 35,000 Raspbian packages, optimized for best 
performance on the Raspberry Pi, was completed in June of 2012. However, 
Raspbian is still under active development with an emphasis on improving 
the stability and performance of as many Debian packages as possible.


Note: Raspbian is not affiliated with the Raspberry Pi Foundation. 
Raspbian was created by a small, dedicated team of developers that are 
fans of the Raspberry Pi hardware, the educational goals of the 
Raspberry Pi Foundation and, of course, the Debian Project.



Why are you trying to tell someone that has used raspberry pi since the 
original pi came out things that are just not true.


I also build custom OS for the raspberry pi platform and I am well 
versed with them. I have approx a dozen of them from rpi to rpi 5


I have used them for servers on the network including the original pi.

Yes I am aware of theis in the foundation page:

Your Raspberry Pi needs an operating system to work. This is it. 
Raspberry Pi OS (previously called Raspbian) is our official supported 
operating system.


The new OS called Raspberry Pi OS is a new animal.  The foundation used 
raspian and the the Raspberry Pi OS is the foundations, developed by the 
foundation.


--
Hindi madali ang maging ako

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[debian-user]

Gremlin  wrote:

> The provider is raspberry foundation and Raspian has been
> dis-continued.

There is such a thing as the Raspberry Pi Foundation but they are an
educational charity. Pis are supplied by Raspberry Pi Ltd. Raspbian has
NOT been discontinued, it has simply been renamed Raspberry Pi OS. I
don't know who releases it, though it is released from teh Ltd company
website rather than the Foundation. Perhaps somebody else knows more
detail.

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 10:08, Jeffrey Walton wrote:



Unable to Process Request
We couldn't access the content delivery.

This content has been deleted, doesn't exist, or can't be previewed.

Gonna be hard to do that


OP might then take a look at editing the elf file directly. `objdump
--remove-section .symver blueriver_bitmap_streamer` should do the
trick.


Why?


The OP wants to run his software.

Surely you have a better question than "Why," but I don't know what it is.

Jeff




Nope it is exactly WHY?

Why not install the latest OS for raspberry pi and you won't have an 
issue.  Get it?


--
Hindi madali ang maging ako

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 9:28 AM Gremlin  wrote:
>
> On 2/27/24 09:23, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:34 AM Gremlin  
> > wrote:
> >> [...]
> >>> Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the
> >>> build, rip out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol
> >>> versioning does is to cause a DoS and frustrate users.
> >>>
> >>> You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping
> >>> for '.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.
> >>
> >> https://info.semtech.com/blueriver-av-manager
> >>
> >> The source:
> >>
> >> https://semtech.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#E000JelG/a/RQ01m7Hx/ptDTNUqlZvD_8F_SbhjtoHaX9jOZ_fKxuauW0cZp5ag?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Finfo.semtech.com%2F
> >>
> >> Unable to Process Request
> >> We couldn't access the content delivery.
> >>
> >> This content has been deleted, doesn't exist, or can't be previewed.
> >>
> >> Gonna be hard to do that
> >
> > OP might then take a look at editing the elf file directly. `objdump
> > --remove-section .symver blueriver_bitmap_streamer` should do the
> > trick.
>
> Why?

The OP wants to run his software.

Surely you have a better question than "Why," but I don't know what it is.

Jeff

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 09:23, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:34 AM Gremlin  wrote:


On 2/27/24 08:27, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 5:52 AM Diego Luo （罗国雄）  wrote:


Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the 
specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?

I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, 
which is Debian based OS.

When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
and GLIBC, with the details below.

root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version 
`GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#


Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the
build, rip out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol
versioning does is to cause a DoS and frustrate users.

You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping
for '.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.


https://info.semtech.com/blueriver-av-manager

The source:

https://semtech.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#E000JelG/a/RQ01m7Hx/ptDTNUqlZvD_8F_SbhjtoHaX9jOZ_fKxuauW0cZp5ag?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Finfo.semtech.com%2F

Unable to Process Request
We couldn't access the content delivery.

This content has been deleted, doesn't exist, or can't be previewed.

Gonna be hard to do that


OP might then take a look at editing the elf file directly. `objdump
--remove-section .symver blueriver_bitmap_streamer` should do the
trick.

Jeff




Why?

Install a supported up to date OS and it should just work.
Raspian is an unsupported OS and has zero future.




--
Hindi madali ang maging ako

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 8:34 AM Gremlin  wrote:
>
> On 2/27/24 08:27, Jeffrey Walton wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 5:52 AM Diego Luo （罗国雄）  wrote:
> >>
> >> Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to 
> >> the specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?
> >>
> >> I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
> >> 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 
> >> GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.
> >>
> >> When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of 
> >> GLIBCXX and GLIBC, with the details below.
> >>
> >> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# 
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer
> >>
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: 
> >> version `GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by 
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> >>
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> >> `GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> >>
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> >> `GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> >>
> >> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> >> `GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> >>
> >> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#
> >
> > Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the
> > build, rip out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol
> > versioning does is to cause a DoS and frustrate users.
> >
> > You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping
> > for '.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.
>
> https://info.semtech.com/blueriver-av-manager
>
> The source:
>
> https://semtech.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#E000JelG/a/RQ01m7Hx/ptDTNUqlZvD_8F_SbhjtoHaX9jOZ_fKxuauW0cZp5ag?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Finfo.semtech.com%2F
>
> Unable to Process Request
> We couldn't access the content delivery.
>
> This content has been deleted, doesn't exist, or can't be previewed.
>
> Gonna be hard to do that

OP might then take a look at editing the elf file directly. `objdump
--remove-section .symver blueriver_bitmap_streamer` should do the
trick.

Jeff

ARMv7 problematic? (was: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version)

[Stefan Monnier]

> He is most likely using armv7 and that comes with its own issues, ie
> cpu type and floating point (hard/soft, neon and simd).  aarch64 much
> easier to build on.

I'm using Debian armhf here on various machines (most of them with ARMv7
CPUs but some one of them with an ARMv8 CPU (and kernel)).
I haven't encountered any particular problem (both in terms of using and
installing Debian and in terms of "manually" building software from
source) that seems related to ARMv7 vs ARMv8.


Stefan

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 08:27, Jeffrey Walton wrote:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 5:52 AM Diego Luo （罗国雄）  wrote:


Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the 
specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?

I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, 
which is Debian based OS.

When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
and GLIBC, with the details below.

root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version 
`GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)

root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#


Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the
build, rip out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol
versioning does is to cause a DoS and frustrate users.

You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping
for '.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.

Jeff




https://info.semtech.com/blueriver-av-manager

The source:

https://semtech.my.salesforce.com/sfc/p/#E000JelG/a/RQ01m7Hx/ptDTNUqlZvD_8F_SbhjtoHaX9jOZ_fKxuauW0cZp5ag?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Finfo.semtech.com%2F

Unable to Process Request
We couldn't access the content delivery.


This content has been deleted, doesn't exist, or can't be previewed.


Gonna be hard to do that

--
Hindi madali ang maging ako

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Jeffrey Walton]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 5:52 AM Diego Luo （罗国雄）  wrote:
>
> Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to 
> the specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?
>
> I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
> 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 
> GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.
>
> When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
> and GLIBC, with the details below.
>
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# 
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> `GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
>
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#

Another option is to rebuild blueriver_bitmap_streamer. Before the
build, rip out that useless symbol versioning. All that symbol
versioning does is to cause a DoS and frustrate users.

You can find the ASM directives to rip out the versioning by grepping
for '.symver'. It will be in an ASM block.

Jeff

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 08:15, Greg Wooledge wrote:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 08:08:47AM -0500, Gremlin wrote:


On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:51:13AM +, Diego Luo （罗国雄） wrote:

I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux
raspberrypi 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44
BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.



He is most likely using armv7 and that comes with its own issues, ie cpu
type and floating point (hard/soft, neon and simd).  aarch64 much easier to
build on.


It looks like he's using aarch64.




You can not tell from that as he could be using a armv7 system and run a 
aarch64 kernel,  The foundation always run the 64 bit kernel on the 32 
bit system. The 32 bit installation script sets the flag in the 
config.txt file to run a 64 bit kernel on the 32 bit system on the rpi4.


From /boot/config.txt

# Run in 64-bit mode
arm_64bit=1

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 08:08:47AM -0500, Gremlin wrote:

> > > On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:51:13AM +, Diego Luo （罗国雄） wrote:
> > > > I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux
> > > > raspberrypi 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44
> > > > BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.

> He is most likely using armv7 and that comes with its own issues, ie cpu
> type and floating point (hard/soft, neon and simd).  aarch64 much easier to
> build on.

It looks like he's using aarch64.

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Gremlin]

On 2/27/24 07:38, Arno Lehmann wrote:

Hi all,

Am 27.02.2024 um 13:19 schrieb Greg Wooledge:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:51:13AM +, Diego Luo （罗国雄） wrote:

Hi,

Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and 
GLIBC to the specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?


I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux 
raspberrypi 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 
2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.


That's a problem -- it is not Debian.


The new version for Rpi is and would not matter in his case as he is 
looking to update glibc.  That isn't platform pacific and doesn't matter.


Rpi 5:

uname -a
Linux scott 6.1.0-rpi8-rpi-2712 #1 SMP PREEMPT Debian 1:6.1.73-1+rpt1 
(2024-01-25) aarch64 GNU/Linux


cat /etc/os-release
PRETTY_NAME="Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)"
NAME="Debian GNU/Linux"
VERSION_ID="12"
VERSION="12 (bookworm)"
VERSION_CODENAME=bookworm
ID=debian
HOME_URL="https://www.debian.org/";
SUPPORT_URL="https://www.debian.org/support";
BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.debian.org/";



Expecting insight here is a bit of a stretch. It would be much better to 
check with the actual distribution provider.


The provider is raspberry foundation and Raspian has been dis-continued.



Greg's advice about upgrading is demonstrating the versions for the 
x86_64 platform. This may or may not be directly applicable to your 
distribution. However, trying to upgrade something non-Debian with 
Debian packages may be exciting and provide great learning experience, 
but rarely is a smooth process.


sudo find /usr/lib -name '*libc.so*'
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so

nm -D /usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 | grep 'A GLIBC_2\.3[0-9]'
 A GLIBC_2.30
 A GLIBC_2.31
 A GLIBC_2.32
 A GLIBC_2.33
 A GLIBC_2.34
 A GLIBC_2.35
 A GLIBC_2.36

sudo find /usr/lib -name '*libstdc++.so*'
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.30
/usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6
/usr/lib/gcc/aarch64-linux-gnu/12/libstdc++.so


nm -D /usr/lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.30 | grep 'A 
GLIBCXX_3\.4\.[23][0-9]'

 A GLIBCXX_3.4.20
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.21
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.22
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.23
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.24
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.25
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.26
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.27
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.28
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.29
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.30



I would propose to head over to https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/ if 
you do not get very clear advice here.


Also, the actual software you want to use should be considered. If it's 
not packaged for your distribution, it's at least clear the packager 
does not guarantee anything. Rebuilding for your platform requires 
access to source code and (possibly) build environment. Suggestions or 
advice require you to disclose what you're actually looking at.


Good luck!

Arno



The correct solution is to download the latest and install that.
That is simple as rpi has an imager program that will d/l and install 
the image to the sdcard or USB drive.


Updating glibc can be difficult and may cause more breakage.
You should take that project lightly.

He is most likely using armv7 and that comes with its own issues, ie cpu 
type and floating point (hard/soft, neon and simd).  aarch64 much easier 
to build on.


Building custom OS for rpi since the rpi 1.  Will be building a custom 
OS for my rpi 4/5 servers and abandoning debian shortly, Desktop to follow.

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Arno Lehmann]

Hi all,

Am 27.02.2024 um 13:19 schrieb Greg Wooledge:

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:51:13AM +, Diego Luo （罗国雄） wrote:

Hi,

Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the 
specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?

I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, 
which is Debian based OS.


That's a problem -- it is not Debian.

Expecting insight here is a bit of a stretch. It would be much better to 
check with the actual distribution provider.


Greg's advice about upgrading is demonstrating the versions for the 
x86_64 platform. This may or may not be directly applicable to your 
distribution. However, trying to upgrade something non-Debian with 
Debian packages may be exciting and provide great learning experience, 
but rarely is a smooth process.


I would propose to head over to https://www.raspberrypi.com/software/ if 
you do not get very clear advice here.


Also, the actual software you want to use should be considered. If it's 
not packaged for your distribution, it's at least clear the packager 
does not guarantee anything. Rebuilding for your platform requires 
access to source code and (possibly) build environment. Suggestions or 
advice require you to disclose what you're actually looking at.


Good luck!

Arno

--
Arno Lehmann

IT-Service Lehmann
Sandstr. 6, 49080 Osnabrück

Re: How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Greg Wooledge]

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 06:51:13AM +, Diego Luo （罗国雄） wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to 
> the specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?
> 
> I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
> 5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 
> GNU/Linux”, which is Debian based OS.
> When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
> and GLIBC, with the details below.
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# 
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version 
> `GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
> `GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
> root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#

Your libc6 and libstdc++6 packages are too old to run this program.
Your choices are:

1) Find another, older, build of this program that's suitable for your
   system.

2) Recompile it yourself, if source code is available.

3) Find a substitute program.

4) Upgrade your operating system to a newer release.

Debian 12 (bookworm) should be new enough:

hobbit:~$ nm -D /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 | grep 'A GLIBC_2\.3[0-9]'
 A GLIBC_2.30
 A GLIBC_2.31
 A GLIBC_2.32
 A GLIBC_2.33
 A GLIBC_2.34
 A GLIBC_2.35
 A GLIBC_2.36

hobbit:~$ nm -D /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6 | grep 'A 
GLIBCXX_3\.4\.[23][0-9]'
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.20
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.21
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.22
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.23
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.24
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.25
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.26
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.27
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.28
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.29
 A GLIBCXX_3.4.30

How to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the specific version

[Diego Luo （罗国雄）]

Hi,

Would you pls help give tips about how to upgrade the GLIBCXX and GLIBC to the 
specific version (GLIBCXX_3.4.29, GLIBC_2.34) on Debian?

I am using the Raspberry Pi 4B with the Raspbian OS “Linux raspberrypi 
5.15.61-v8+ #1579 SMP PREEMPT Fri Aug 26 11:16:44 BST 2022 aarch64 GNU/Linux”, 
which is Debian based OS.
When running a SW I met the problem missing the required versions of GLIBCXX 
and GLIBC, with the details below.
root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64# ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer
./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version 
`GLIBCXX_3.4.29' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.32' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
./blueriver_bitmap_streamer: /lib/aarch64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version 
`GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./blueriver_bitmap_streamer)
root@raspberrypi:/home/bitmap_overlap/linux-aarch64#

Thanks.

Best Regards
Diego


To view our privacy policy, including the types of personal information we 
collect, process and share, and the rights and options you have in this 
respect, see www.semtech.com/legal.

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 1:20 PM, Arno Schuring 
wrote:

> > Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:41:44 +0100
> > From: zen75...@zen.co.uk
> >
> > On 06/07/15 06:07, Dhiraj Bhor wrote:
> >> Also wanted to know which are security bugs reported for glibc-2.19-18.
> >> Thanks for being patient.
> >
> > Information about current bugs in Debian packages can be found through
> > the Bug Tracking System at https://bugs.debian.org/
> >
> > Upstream bug information for GNU libc can be found at
> > https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/
>
> There's also
> https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/glibc
>
>
> Regards,
> Arno
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive:
> https://lists.debian.org/dub124-w3889e0ba209b984db2aa49b8...@phx.gbl
>
> Thanks all for all the links and information.

Dhiraj

RE: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Arno Schuring]

> Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2015 08:41:44 +0100
> From: zen75...@zen.co.uk
>
> On 06/07/15 06:07, Dhiraj Bhor wrote:
>> Also wanted to know which are security bugs reported for glibc-2.19-18.
>> Thanks for being patient.
>
> Information about current bugs in Debian packages can be found through
> the Bug Tracking System at https://bugs.debian.org/
>
> Upstream bug information for GNU libc can be found at
> https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/

There's also https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/source-package/glibc


Regards,
Arno

  

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/dub124-w3889e0ba209b984db2aa49b8...@phx.gbl

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Martin Read]

On 06/07/15 06:07, Dhiraj Bhor wrote:

Also wanted to know which are security bugs reported for glibc-2.19-18.
Thanks for being patient.


Information about current bugs in Debian packages can be found through 
the Bug Tracking System at https://bugs.debian.org/


Upstream bug information for GNU libc can be found at 
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/559a3138.2090...@zen.co.uk

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[David Wright]

Quoting Dhiraj Bhor (dhirajbho...@gmail.com):
> 
> I read from https://wiki.debian.org/DebianExperimental link that installing
> experimental package will functinaly break the system.
> I want to know when experimental branch will become stable,

In a word, never.

> Do i get any page
> where this information already exist?

https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/resources#s4.6.4
specifically 4.6.4.3

Cheers,
David.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150706051856.GA20837@alum

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2015 at 10:17 AM, Dhiraj Bhor  wrote:

>
> I read from https://wiki.debian.org/DebianExperimental link that
> installing experimental package will functinaly break the system.
> I want to know when experimental branch will become stable, Do i get any
> page where this information already exist?
>
Also wanted to know which are security bugs reported for glibc-2.19-18.
Thanks for being patient.

Dhiraj

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

I read from https://wiki.debian.org/DebianExperimental link that installing
experimental package will functinaly break the system.
I want to know when experimental branch will become stable, Do i get any
page where this information already exist?

Dhiraj

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:46 PM, Arno Schuring 
wrote:

>
> > Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:37:03 +0530
> > From: dhirajbho...@gmail.com
> > On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:31 PM, claude juif
> > mailto:claude.j...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > If you really need latest development tools, i suggest you to switch to
> > Fedora 22. (glibc-2.21-5 and gcc 5.1.1). It will be easier and faster
> > than trying to modify glibc stuff in Debian 8.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > I would like to but its a requirement and i have to do  it. No option.
> > May be if i can patch the glibc with all security patches will be
> > enough for me.
>
> What exactly is the requirement? That you develop against latest libc
> or that you deploy with latest libc? Because you mentioning security
> patches makes me suspect it's the latter, in which case it's a seriously
> bad idea to build your own. Are you going to subscribe to the CVE lists
> and rebuild every security patch yourself? Have you factored the ongoing
> maintenance cost of that in your project?
>
> If it's only that your project needs to build against the latest glibc,
> I recommend you start with an unstable buildroot (man debootstrap), and
> install your latest libraries in there. You don't even need to develop
> in the chroot, just develop on your own and run the integration tests in
> the chroot.
>
>
> Regards,
> Arno
>
> Thanks @Darac. i am new to this, But what i understood is debian system
must have glibc which is shipped as with installation media and better i
don't mess with it.
I will try the experimental branch.
@Amo: Your suggestion about ROI is acceptable and thanks for reminding the
cost effectiveness for the same.

RE: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Arno Schuring]

> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2015 15:37:03 +0530 
> From: dhirajbho...@gmail.com 
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:31 PM, claude juif  
> mailto:claude.j...@gmail.com>> wrote: 
> Hi, 
>  
> If you really need latest development tools, i suggest you to switch to  
> Fedora 22. (glibc-2.21-5 and gcc 5.1.1). It will be easier and faster  
> than trying to modify glibc stuff in Debian 8. 
>  
> Regards, 
>  
> I would like to but its a requirement and i have to do  it. No option. 
> May be if i can patch the glibc with all security patches will be  
> enough for me. 

What exactly is the requirement? That you develop against latest libc
or that you deploy with latest libc? Because you mentioning security
patches makes me suspect it's the latter, in which case it's a seriously
bad idea to build your own. Are you going to subscribe to the CVE lists
and rebuild every security patch yourself? Have you factored the ongoing
maintenance cost of that in your project?

If it's only that your project needs to build against the latest glibc,
I recommend you start with an unstable buildroot (man debootstrap), and
install your latest libraries in there. You don't even need to develop
in the chroot, just develop on your own and run the integration tests in
the chroot.


Regards,
Arno
  

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/dub124-w397696c524f08c62438ac4b8...@phx.gbl

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Darac Marjal]

On Fri, Jul 03, 2015 at 12:07:26PM +0530, Dhiraj Bhor wrote:
>Hi,
>I have debian jessie (8.0) on virtual machine.
>$] uname -a
>Linux rdx86-ds7 3.16.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt9-3~deb8u1
>(2015-04-24) i686 GNU/Linux
>I need to install latest glibc (libc-2.21) on this machine.

glibc 2.21 is in experimental. Read
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianExperimental to learn how to use
experimental.


-- 
For more information, please reread.


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:31 PM, claude juif  wrote:

> Hi,
>
> If you really need latest development tools, i suggest you to switch to
> Fedora 22. (glibc-2.21-5 and gcc 5.1.1). It will be easier and faster than
> trying to modify glibc stuff in Debian 8.
>
> Regards,
>
> I would like to but its a requirement and i have to do  it. No option.
May be if i can patch the glibc with all security patches will be enough
for me.

Dhiraj

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[claude juif]

Hi,

If you really need latest development tools, i suggest you to switch to
Fedora 22. (glibc-2.21-5 and gcc 5.1.1). It will be easier and faster than
trying to modify glibc stuff in Debian 8.

Regards,

2015-07-03 11:56 GMT+02:00 Dhiraj Bhor :

>
>
> On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Sven Hartge  wrote:
>
>> Dhiraj Bhor  wrote:
>>
>> > $] wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.21.tar.xz
>> > $] tar xf glibc-2.21.tar.xz
>> > $] mkdir glibc-test
>> > $] cd glibc-test
>> > $] ../glibc-2.21/configure --prefix=/usr
>>
>> You do know that installing your own glibc over the one supplied by
>> Debian in the same path will most likely destroy your system.
>>
>> If you do this to observe the effects of overwriting the system glibc
>> without proper prepartion, then all is fine.
>>
>> If not, then please describe what you are trying to accomplish.
>>
>> Grüße,
>> Sven.
>>
>> For my work requirement i need to build my project with latest glibc.
> Yes i do understand that this can crash the system and i read some
> documents but i am not getting success.
> I have tried installing with --prefix=$HOME/objdir/ but no success. I have
> got segmentation fault every time. (and reverted the machine to previous
> working snapshot and tried again)
>
> Dhiraj
>
>

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Sven Hartge  wrote:

> Dhiraj Bhor  wrote:
>
> > $] wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.21.tar.xz
> > $] tar xf glibc-2.21.tar.xz
> > $] mkdir glibc-test
> > $] cd glibc-test
> > $] ../glibc-2.21/configure --prefix=/usr
>
> You do know that installing your own glibc over the one supplied by
> Debian in the same path will most likely destroy your system.
>
> If you do this to observe the effects of overwriting the system glibc
> without proper prepartion, then all is fine.
>
> If not, then please describe what you are trying to accomplish.
>
> Grüße,
> Sven.
>
> For my work requirement i need to build my project with latest glibc.
Yes i do understand that this can crash the system and i read some
documents but i am not getting success.
I have tried installing with --prefix=$HOME/objdir/ but no success. I have
got segmentation fault every time. (and reverted the machine to previous
working snapshot and tried again)

Dhiraj

Re: Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Sven Hartge]

Dhiraj Bhor  wrote:

> $] wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.21.tar.xz
> $] tar xf glibc-2.21.tar.xz
> $] mkdir glibc-test
> $] cd glibc-test
> $] ../glibc-2.21/configure --prefix=/usr

You do know that installing your own glibc over the one supplied by
Debian in the same path will most likely destroy your system.

If you do this to observe the effects of overwriting the system glibc
without proper prepartion, then all is fine.

If not, then please describe what you are trying to accomplish.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/15bo8a60i3...@mids.svenhartge.de

Installing glibc-2.21 on debian-8

[Dhiraj Bhor]

Hi,

I have debian jessie (8.0) on virtual machine.
$] uname -a
Linux rdx86-ds7 3.16.0-4-686-pae #1 SMP Debian 3.16.7-ckt9-3~deb8u1
(2015-04-24) i686 GNU/Linux

I need to install latest glibc (libc-2.21) on this machine.
My debian currently have libc-2.19
$] ls -lah /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Apr 14 17:21 /lib/i386-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 ->
libc-2.19.so

I came across some documents and installed following packages as
prerequisites:
$] apt-get install linux-headers-$(uname -r)
$] apt-get install build-essentials

After this I have gcc-4.9.2
$] gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
COLLECT_GCC=gcc
COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/lib/gcc/i586-linux-gnu/4.9/lto-wrapper
Target: i586-linux-gnu
Configured with: ../src/configure -v --with-pkgversion='Debian 4.9.2-10'
--with-bugurl=file:///usr/share/doc/gcc-4.9/README.Bugs
--enable-languages=c,c++,java,go,d,fortran,objc,obj-c++ --prefix=/usr
--program-suffix=-4.9 --enable-shared --enable-linker-build-id
--libexecdir=/usr/lib --without-included-gettext --enable-threads=posix
--with-gxx-include-dir=/usr/include/c++/4.9 --libdir=/usr/lib --enable-nls
--with-sysroot=/ --enable-clocale=gnu --enable-libstdcxx-debug
--enable-libstdcxx-time=yes --enable-gnu-unique-object
--disable-vtable-verify --enable-plugin --with-system-zlib
--disable-browser-plugin --enable-java-awt=gtk --enable-gtk-cairo
--with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-4.9-i386/jre
--enable-java-home --with-jvm-root-dir=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.5.0-gcj-4.9-i386
--with-jvm-jar-dir=/usr/lib/jvm-exports/java-1.5.0-gcj-4.9-i386
--with-arch-directory=i386 --with-ecj-jar=/usr/share/java/eclipse-ecj.jar
--enable-objc-gc --enable-targets=all --enable-multiarch
--with-arch-32=i586 --with-multilib-list=m32,m64,mx32 --enable-multilib
--with-tune=generic --enable-checking=release --build=i586-linux-gnu
--host=i586-linux-gnu --target=i586-linux-gnu
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.9.2 (Debian 4.9.2-10)

$] cd /home/build/
$] wget http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/glibc/glibc-2.21.tar.xz
$] tar xf glibc-2.21.tar.xz
$] mkdir glibc-test
$] cd glibc-test
$] ../glibc-2.21/configure --prefix=/usr
configure: error:
*** These critical programs are missing or too old: gawk
*** Check the INSTALL file for required versions.

$] apt-get install gawk
$] ../glibc-2.21/configure --prefix=/usr
$] echo $?
0
$] make
$] echo $?
0
$] make check

make  subdir=string -C string ..=../ tests
make[2]: Entering directory '/home/build/glibc-2.21/string'
gcc tester.c -c -std=gnu99 -fgnu89-inline  -O2 -Wall -Werror -Winline
-Wno-error=undef -Wundef -Wwrite-strings -fmerge-all-constants
-frounding-math -g -Wstrict-prototypes   -Wa,-mtune=i686
 -I../include -I/home/build/glibc-test/string  -I/home/build/glibc-test
 -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386/i686  -I../sysdeps/i386/i686/nptl
 -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/i386  -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86
 -I../sysdeps/i386/nptl  -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/include
-I../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux  -I../sysdeps/nptl  -I../sysdeps/pthread
 -I../sysdeps/gnu  -I../sysdeps/unix/inet  -I../sysdeps/unix/sysv
 -I../sysdeps/unix/i386  -I../sysdeps/unix  -I../sysdeps/posix
 -I../sysdeps/i386/i686/fpu/multiarch  -I../sysdeps/i386/i686/fpu
 -I../sysdeps/i386/i686/multiarch  -I../sysdeps/i386/i686
 -I../sysdeps/i386/i486  -I../sysdeps/i386/fpu
 -I../sysdeps/x86/fpu/include -I../sysdeps/x86/fpu  -I../sysdeps/i386
 -I../sysdeps/x86  -I../sysdeps/wordsize-32  -I../sysdeps/ieee754/ldbl-96
 -I../sysdeps/ieee754/dbl-64  -I../sysdeps/ieee754/flt-32
 -I../sysdeps/ieee754  -I../sysdeps/generic  -I.. -I../libio -I.
-D_LIBC_REENTRANT -include /home/build/glibc-test/libc-modules.h
-DMODULE_NAME=nonlib -include ../include/libc-symbols.h   -o
/home/build/glibc-test/string/tester.o -MD -MP -MF
/home/build/glibc-test/string/tester.o.dt -MT
/home/build/glibc-test/string/tester.o
tester.c: In function ‘test_memset’:
tester.c:1313:10: error: ‘memset’ used with constant zero length parameter;
this could be due to transposed parameters [-Werror=memset-transposed-args]
   (void) memset(one+2, 'y', 0);
  ^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
../o-iterator.mk:9: recipe for target
'/home/build/glibc-test/string/tester.o' failed
make[2]: *** [/home/build/glibc-test/string/tester.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory '/home/build/glibc-2.21/string'
Makefile:213: recipe for target 'string/tests' failed
make[1]: *** [string/tests] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory '/home/build/glibc-2.21'
Makefile:9: recipe for target 'check' failed
make: *** [check] Error 2

I found comment#13 on https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61294
Similar threads:
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=56977
https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=51744

Please correct me if i am wrong
I have to install gcc-5.0 or above to install glibc-2.21?
Is there no way around?

Regards,
Dhiraj

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Cindy-Sue Causey]

On 1/29/15, Ric Moore  wrote:
> On 01/29/2015 02:08 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
>> Stephen  wrote:
>>
>>> I wouldn't mind building it by hand, I'm trying to get more 'hands on'
>>> (pun completely intended) with Debian. I am just a novice user though
>>> so I have a very faint clue what your talking about...
>>
>> If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
>> with.
>
> Jessie is completely stable, according to my experience. You will be
> better off just doing a fresh install, after backing up personal files.


I was thinking the exact same thing, that Jessie has proved stable
*for me*. That's a disclaimer intended to mean everyone's own
experience can and will vary.. Jessie's in fact *so stable* for me,
I'm actually bored. I debootstrapped Sid couple hours ago and am
just running through my inbox before attempting to set Sid up tonight.

After years of doing these kinds of things every possible way wrong,
my most likely path now in a situation like this would be to go the
route of installing the whole new newer release (upgrade) if that is
the only place the desired package is found. With installing a whole
new unified release, everything is intended to work together rather
than, for example, us users trying to shove one of Jessie's new square
pegs into a potentially non-existent old round hole in Wheezy.

And I would be doing the above *KNOWING* Jessie is still labeled as
*testing* which means not guaranteed stable even though many of us are
finding it works well right now.

Good luck whichever route you go!

Cindy :)

-- 
Cindy-Sue Causey
Talking Rock, Pickens County, Georgia, USA

* Installing Sid?! Got a fire extinguisher handy just in case? CHECK! *


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/cao1p-kag47t8abswgsowpx1x4af8vzb--zgbnqektegqxyx...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Reco]

 Hi.

On Sat, 31 Jan 2015 11:35:54 +0100
Håkon Alstadheim  wrote:

> On 29. jan. 2015 20:12, Stephen wrote:
> > On 01/29/2015 11:08 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:
> >> If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
> >> with.
> >>
> >> Grüße,
> >> Sven.
> >>
> > Hmm, that is scary. I don't want to break anything. I am quite 
> > adventurous but I can handle not playing VV until Jessie releases 
> > if that is the case.
> >
> >
> 
> How would lxc be in this use-case? Specifically how would a container 
> access a graphics display ?

1) Running VV via 'ssh -X'. Straightforward, and requires doing
something else with the sound.

2) Running a VNC server inside the container. Unsuitable for games
IMO, but straightforward.

3) Running a separate X server inside the container. Requires allowing
the container to use at least /dev/input/*, /dev/dri/*, and, of
course, a tty (see [1] as an example). Leaves the sound question open
too.

[1] http://mraw.org/blog/2011/04/05/Running_X_from_LXC

Reco


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/20150131204920.dc2c5c564a6ce13ebc570...@gmail.com

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Håkon Alstadheim]

On 29. jan. 2015 20:12, Stephen wrote:

On 01/29/2015 11:08 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:

If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
with.

Grüße,
Sven.

Hmm, that is scary. I don't want to break anything. I am quite 
adventurous but I can handle not playing VV until Jessie releases 
if that is the case.





How would lxc be in this use-case? Specifically how would a container 
access a graphics display ?


Generally containers would be a great relief to have when playing with 
unsafe s^H computing :-) .




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54ccb00a.40...@alstadheim.priv.no

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Siard]

Stephen wrote:
> I don't want to break anything. I am quite adventurous but I can
> handle not playing VV until Jessie releases

I just tried the Windows demo with this command:

$ wine ./vv_demo.exe

No need to install anything, it seems to run fine.
So, until Jessie releases, running vv.exe with wine could be an
option.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150129220104.1dc20bb8.shiems...@kpnplanet.nl

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Ric Moore]

On 01/29/2015 02:08 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:

Stephen  wrote:

On 01/29/2015 10:46 AM, Florent Peterschmitt wrote:



Or a custom glibc installed in an isolated prefix, then playing with
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to load the new glibc.



Or if you don't want to build it by hand, you may do something
tricky: extracting the Jessie package by hand in, again, an isolated
prefix.  But i'm not that sure it would work.



I wouldn't mind building it by hand, I'm trying to get more 'hands on'
(pun completely intended) with Debian. I am just a novice user though
so I have a very faint clue what your talking about...


If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
with.


Jessie is completely stable, according to my experience. You will be 
better off just doing a fresh install, after backing up personal files. 
:) Ric




--
My father, Victor Moore (Vic) used to say:
"There are two Great Sins in the world...
..the Sin of Ignorance, and the Sin of Stupidity.
Only the former may be overcome." R.I.P. Dad.
Linux user# 44256


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54ca8dc0.4010...@gmail.com

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Sven Hartge]

Stephen  wrote:
> On 01/29/2015 11:08 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:

>> If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to
>> mess with.

> Hmm, that is scary. I don't want to break anything. I am quite
> adventurous but I can handle not playing VV until Jessie releases
> if that is the case.

The glibc (or libc6) is _the_ central system library. Mess with it and
you summon the sixth circle of hell right to your room :)

Doing things with the glibc while inexperienced results nearly always in
a reinstall of your system.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/9bbgmlava...@mids.svenhartge.de

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Stephen]

On 01/29/2015 11:08 AM, Sven Hartge wrote:

If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
with.

Grüße,
Sven.

Hmm, that is scary. I don't want to break anything. I am quite 
adventurous but I can handle not playing VV until Jessie releases if 
that is the case.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54ca8604.5060...@gmail.com

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Sven Hartge]

Stephen  wrote:
> On 01/29/2015 10:46 AM, Florent Peterschmitt wrote:

>> Or a custom glibc installed in an isolated prefix, then playing with
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH to load the new glibc.

>> Or if you don't want to build it by hand, you may do something
>> tricky: extracting the Jessie package by hand in, again, an isolated
>> prefix.  But i'm not that sure it would work.

> I wouldn't mind building it by hand, I'm trying to get more 'hands on'
> (pun completely intended) with Debian. I am just a novice user though
> so I have a very faint clue what your talking about...

If you are a novice user, the glibc is the _last_ thing you want to mess
with.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/8bbglcnva...@mids.svenhartge.de

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Florent Peterschmitt]

On 01/29/2015 07:59 PM, Stephen wrote:
> 
> On 01/29/2015 10:46 AM, Florent Peterschmitt wrote:
>> Or a custom glibc installed in an isolated prefix, then playing with
>> LD_LIBRARY_PATH to load the new glibc.
> 
>> Or if you don't want to build it by hand, you may do something tricky:
>> extracting the Jessie package by hand in, again, an isolated prefix.
>> But i'm not that sure it would work.
> 
> I wouldn't mind building it by hand, I'm trying to get more 'hands on'
> (pun completely intended) with Debian. I am just a novice user though so
> I have a very faint clue what your talking about...

I understand.

Well, you don't have much choices. Force-install a newer glibc in the
base system will break your entire system, so here are the options:

 * install another version of Debian containing the required glibc version

 * install another distro if you don't want to use "unstable" softwares.
if you want to stay on a debian-like and are a novice, can I suggest you
Ubuntu or LinuxMint?

 * build your glibc by hand (see LFS pages[0], they can be helpful) but
install files (not configuration) in, say, /opt/glibc-. Then to
use you'll need to play with some environment variables. At least you
know how to run a program from command line, so env variables are just
the next step :-)

 * download the newer, packaged, version of glibc from unstable or
testing Debian, extract it by hand and put files in a prefix, like
before. Then use env vars an pray for it to work.



[0]
http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter06/glibc.html



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Stephen]

On 01/29/2015 10:46 AM, Florent Peterschmitt wrote:
Or a custom glibc installed in an isolated prefix, then playing with 
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to load the new glibc.


Or if you don't want to build it by hand, you may do something tricky: 
extracting the Jessie package by hand in, again, an isolated prefix. 
But i'm not that sure it would work.


I wouldn't mind building it by hand, I'm trying to get more 'hands on' 
(pun completely intended) with Debian. I am just a novice user though so 
I have a very faint clue what your talking about...



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54ca830d.3040...@gmail.com

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Florent Peterschmitt]

On 01/29/2015 07:31 PM, Sven Hartge wrote:
> Stephen  wrote:
> 
>> I'm trying to run the game VV on my system but whenever I try and
>> launch it I get the following error: "./x86/vv.x86:
>> /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not
>> found (required by ./x86/libSDL2-2.0.so.0)"
> 
>> I tried looking for glibc 2.15 in the software repository but could
>> find no such package. How do I satisfy this dependency then?
> 
> You need at least Debian Jessie/Testing für a glibc new enough.
> 
> Grüße,
> Sven.
> 

Or a custom glibc installed in an isolated prefix, then playing with
LD_LIBRARY_PATH to load the new glibc.

Or if you don't want to build it by hand, you may do something tricky:
extracting the Jessie package by hand in, again, an isolated prefix. But
i'm not that sure it would work.



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Sven Hartge]

Stephen  wrote:

> I'm trying to run the game VV on my system but whenever I try and
> launch it I get the following error: "./x86/vv.x86:
> /lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not
> found (required by ./x86/libSDL2-2.0.so.0)"

> I tried looking for glibc 2.15 in the software repository but could
> find no such package. How do I satisfy this dependency then?

You need at least Debian Jessie/Testing für a glibc new enough.

Grüße,
Sven.

-- 
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/7bbgj80va...@mids.svenhartge.de

Glibc 2.15 not found?

[Stephen]

I'm trying to run the game VV on my system but whenever I try and 
launch it I get the following error: "./x86/vv.x86: 
/lib/i386-linux-gnu/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.15' not found 
(required by ./x86/libSDL2-2.0.so.0)"


I tried looking for glibc 2.15 in the software repository but could find 
no such package. How do I satisfy this dependency then?


-many thanks, Stephen


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: https://lists.debian.org/54ca790d.4050...@gmail.com

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Gene Heskett]

On Wednesday 28 January 2015 09:29:42 Lisi Reisz did opine
And Gene did reply:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:27:18 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> > On Wednesday 28 January 2015 13:25:20 i...@thargoid.co.uk wrote:
> > > On 2015-01-28 12:27, Peter Viskup wrote:
> > > > before considering downtimes and patching activities on
> > > > production servers
> > > > read these:
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283
> > > > 
> > > > especially the second link mention network-facing software which
> > > > is not vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.
> > > 
> > > Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link
> > > does not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for
> > > debian. This was used for proof-of-concept code.
> > > 
> > > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274
> > 
> > So Wheezy users who use Exim are at risk? But it surely then follows
> > that Wheezy users who do not use Exim, or even have it installed,
> > are not at risk?
> > 
> > > > https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
> 
> But I see anyway that it has been patched for Wheezy.  So all is OK.
> 
> Lisi

Also Lucid, I installed it all about 2 hours ago. But haven't rebooted & 
probably should.  And I pointed out the speed with which it was patched to 
a died in the wool winderz using friend of mine. Never miss a chance I 
say. ;-)

Cheers, Gene Heskett
-- 
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene>
US V Castleman, SCOTUS, Mar 2014 is grounds for Impeaching SCOTUS


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201501281048.03001.ghesk...@wdtv.com

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:31:23 Jochen Spieker wrote:
> Lisi Reisz:
> > On Wednesday 28 January 2015 13:25:20 i...@thargoid.co.uk wrote:
> >>> https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
> >>> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283
> >>>
> >>> especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
> >>> vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.
> >>
> >> Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link does
> >> not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for debian. This was
> >> used for proof-of-concept code.
> >>
> >> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274
> >
> > So Wheezy users who use Exim are at risk?
>
> Yes.
>
> > But it surely then follows that Wheezy users who do not use Exim, or
> > even have it installed, are not at risk?
>
> No. The bug is in the most basic C library. I would assume that all
> systems with a vulnerable libc are at risk and update as soon as
> possible.

Thanks, yes.  At first reading I thought it said that there was no update 
available for Squeeze and Wheezy, only for Jessie and Sid.  I posted again 
when I realised my mistake. 

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201501281546.51084.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Jochen Spieker]

Lisi Reisz:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2015 13:25:20 i...@thargoid.co.uk wrote:
>>> 
>>> https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
>>> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283
>>> 
>>> especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
>>> vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.
>> 
>> Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link does
>> not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for debian. This was
>> used for proof-of-concept code.
>> 
>> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274
> 
> So Wheezy users who use Exim are at risk?

Yes.

> But it surely then follows that Wheezy users who do not use Exim, or
> even have it installed, are not at risk?

No. The bug is in the most basic C library. I would assume that all
systems with a vulnerable libc are at risk and update as soon as
possible.

J.
-- 
If all my friends had Playstations I would buy a Nintendo to prove my
individuality.
[Agree]   [Disagree]
 <http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html>


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 28 January 2015 14:27:18 Lisi Reisz wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 January 2015 13:25:20 i...@thargoid.co.uk wrote:
> > On 2015-01-28 12:27, Peter Viskup wrote:
> > > before considering downtimes and patching activities on production
> > > servers
> > > read these:
> > >


> > > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283
> > >
> > > especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
> > > vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.
> >
> > Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link does
> > not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for debian. This was
> > used for proof-of-concept code.
> >
> > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274
>
> So Wheezy users who use Exim are at risk? But it surely then follows that
> Wheezy users who do not use Exim, or even have it installed, are not at
> risk?

> > > https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142

But I see anyway that it has been patched for Wheezy.  So all is OK.

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201501281429.42835.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Lisi Reisz]

On Wednesday 28 January 2015 13:25:20 i...@thargoid.co.uk wrote:
> On 2015-01-28 12:27, Peter Viskup wrote:
> > before considering downtimes and patching activities on production
> > servers
> > read these:
> >
> > https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
> > http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283
> >
> > especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
> > vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.
>
> Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link does
> not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for debian. This was
> used for proof-of-concept code.
>
> http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274

So Wheezy users who use Exim are at risk? But it surely then follows that 
Wheezy users who do not use Exim, or even have it installed, are not at risk?

Lisi


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201501281427.18269.lisi.re...@gmail.com

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[iain]

On 2015-01-28 12:27, Peter Viskup wrote:
before considering downtimes and patching activities on production 
servers

read these:

https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283

especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.


Indeed, however you will notice that the list on the second link does 
not contain exim, the default SMTP server software for debian. This was 
used for proof-of-concept code.


http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/274

Cheers

Iain



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/d30f1297df8658316e790339af625...@thargoid.co.uk

Re: glibc bug - time to patch

[Peter Viskup]

before considering downtimes and patching activities on production servers
read these:

https://www.debian.org/security/2015/dsa-3142
http://seclists.org/oss-sec/2015/q1/283

especially the second link mention network-facing software which is not
vulnerable due to proper sanitization out of glibc.

On Wed, Jan 28, 2015 at 1:20 PM,  wrote:

> Hey all,
>
>   For those that do not know about this yet, seems that glibc has a nasty
> bug in it that should probably be patched. Wheezy and squeeze vulnerable,
> but all you bleeding edge folk should be ok as Jessie and sid seems fine
>
> https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2015-0235
>
> Cheers
>
> Iain
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a
> subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
> Archive: https://lists.debian.org/28f1fa682337d21078d8c83d9c9e03
> a...@thargoid.co.uk
>
>

glibc bug - time to patch

[iain]

Hey all,

  For those that do not know about this yet, seems that glibc has a 
nasty bug in it that should probably be patched. Wheezy and squeeze 
vulnerable, but all you bleeding edge folk should be ok as Jessie and 
sid seems fine


https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2015-0235

Cheers

Iain


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/28f1fa682337d21078d8c83d9c9e0...@thargoid.co.uk

Re: Patch wheezy's glibc to run on ancient kernel (2.6.16)?

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi Sven,

> This is not too worrying since the 2.6.16 kernel has been unsupported
> since 2008, and 2.6.16.27 is even two years older.

Sure, for debian it is fine - however for me, being limited to that
old kernel, it is a showstopper.
Granted, the use-case is rather obscure ;)

> Probably.  To patch eglibc for supporting older kernels, change the
> MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED variable in debian/sysdeps/linux.mk and update the
> check in debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst for the minimum kernel version
> accordingly.

Thanks for the hint about debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst, I would
have missed it for sure.

Package rebuild went without any issues on a chroot-wheezy on my
raspberry, and the patched wheezy works perfectly on my Nokia-770 with
Linux-2.6.16, and is currently compiling stuff directly on the target.
To my surprise the linker didn't complain at all, even though all
libraries and binaries contain 2.6.26 as minimum kernel version.

To me this shows one of the benefits of the loose coupling the
packages within a linux distribution - running Windows-7 userland on a
WinXP kernel wouldn't be that easy I guess ;)

Best regards and thanks a lot for your help, Clemens


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
https://lists.debian.org/CAFvQSYTfTKZu5A1ni0Q7ujsJ=1PBQY=yhhvyswbb+oc8+yq...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Patch wheezy's glibc to run on ancient kernel (2.6.16)?

[Sven Joachim]

On 2014-09-01 10:28 +0200, Clemens Eisserer wrote:

> I would like to run debian wheezy on my nokia-770 (Linux-2.6.16.27) in a
> chroot environment, unfourtunately chroot telling me the kernel is too old.
> The latest version that worked this way is Debian Lenny, which is
> unsupported since mid 2012.

This is not too worrying since the 2.6.16 kernel has been unsupported
since 2008, and 2.6.16.27 is even two years older.

> Because updating the kernel almost impossible (binary wlan driver blob,
> texas instrument`s patched OMAP source tree, ancient toolchain), is there
> any way to patch a debootstrapped debian installation with a self-compiled
> glibc that is compatible with older kernel versions?

Probably.  To patch eglibc for supporting older kernels, change the 
MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED variable in debian/sysdeps/linux.mk and update the
check in debian/debhelper.in/libc.preinst for the minimum kernel version
accordingly.

> I reason I ask is because the minimum kernel version also seems to be
> stored in all the executeables too, e.g. I get the following output on a
> MIPS box:
>
> root@OpenWrt:/usr/bin# file xz
> xz: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, MIPS, MIPS-II version 1 (SYSV), dynamically
> linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, .

The requirement is stored in a section in the binary labeled
NT_GNU_ABI_TAG and is usually the same as the one for the glibc version
the binary was linked with.  AFAIK the dynamic linker does not use this
information for executable programs, but it does for libraries (refuses
to load them if the kernel is too old).

You can set the LD_ASSUME_KERNEL environment variable to tell the
dynamic linker about that you're actually a different kernel.  Here I'm
telling it that my kernel is actually too old:

,
| $ LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.6.25 /bin/true
| /bin/true: error while loading shared libraries: libc.so.6: cannot open 
shared object file: No such file or directory
`

> ... however as the binary does not talk directly to the kernel (or, does
> it?), I don't understand how the binary itself has a requirement on the
> linux kernel.

The binary might make syscalls which are not implemented in older
kernels, but most programs use glibc wrappers instead.  So I think a
wheezy chroot should mostly work once you have rebuilt eglibc.

Cheers,
   Sven


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87ppff18ds@turtle.gmx.de

Patch wheezy's glibc to run on ancient kernel (2.6.16)?

[Clemens Eisserer]

Hi,

I would like to run debian wheezy on my nokia-770 (Linux-2.6.16.27) in a
chroot environment, unfourtunately chroot telling me the kernel is too old.
The latest version that worked this way is Debian Lenny, which is
unsupported since mid 2012.

Because updating the kernel almost impossible (binary wlan driver blob,
texas instrument`s patched OMAP source tree, ancient toolchain), is there
any way to patch a debootstrapped debian installation with a self-compiled
glibc that is compatible with older kernel versions?
I reason I ask is because the minimum kernel version also seems to be
stored in all the executeables too, e.g. I get the following output on a
MIPS box:

root@OpenWrt:/usr/bin# file xz
xz: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, MIPS, MIPS-II version 1 (SYSV), dynamically
linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.26, .

... however as the binary does not talk directly to the kernel (or, does
it?), I don't understand how the binary itself has a requirement on the
linux kernel.

Thank you in advance, Clemens

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Tom H]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Kelly Clowers  wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Carl Fink  wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote:
>>> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
>>>
>>>> Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd 
>>>> have
>>>> to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.
>>>
>>> Maybe first read the thread starting at
>>>
>>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html
>>
>> A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug
>> against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team?
>>
>> Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy
>> releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as
>> my next years-worth of Linux?


> Not a fan of the Arch user culture at all. Also not a fan of their crazy
> packaging system, to the extent that I have been exposed to it.

>From my limited use of Arch, I have nothing bad to say about the "Arch
user culture" and nothing but good things to say about its packages
and its packaging system. Different strokes for different folks...


> I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that
> bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make
> a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages...

If I were to install an Ubuntu package on Debian - *IF* - I wouldn't
add any Ubuntu repository to sources.list. I'd download the deb file
and install it with dpkg.

It may be less work to install Arch (or Ubuntu 12.10, which has the
latest glibc, 2.14) but, if you want to have the latest glibc on
Debian, you could get the source from eglibc.org, rebuild the binary
packages that come from it, and install them; assuming that nothing on
your system'll choke on the new version.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=sw+lukaqfkvhngms420+ggh7yjgbkn6zaywntkqv8w...@mail.gmail.com

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Andrei POPESCU]

On Lu, 10 sep 12, 09:06:56, Kelly Clowers wrote:
> 
> I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that
> bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make
> a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages...
> 
> Later, when Debian gets it you can roll back into pure Debian.
> You have to be very comfortable with resolving crazy apt conflicts
> to pull this off though, which is why I can't necessarily recommend
> it for others. But I can't imagine needing a new glibc that badly.

glibc from Ubuntu?!?! I got the shivers just by reading your mail :p

Kind regards,
Andrei
-- 
Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers:
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Kelly Clowers]

On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Carl Fink  wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote:
>> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
>>
>> > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd 
>> > have
>> > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.
>> >
>> > Really?
>> >
>> > Developers: really?
>> >
>> > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question
>> > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team,
>> > right?
>>
>> Maybe first read the thread starting at
>>
>>    http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html
>
> A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug
> against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team?
>
> Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy
> releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as
> my next years-worth of Linux?

Not a fan of the Arch user culture at all. Also not a fan of their crazy
packaging system, to the extent that I have been exposed to it.

I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that
bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make
a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages...

Later, when Debian gets it you can roll back into pure Debian.
You have to be very comfortable with resolving crazy apt conflicts
to pull this off though, which is why I can't necessarily recommend
it for others. But I can't imagine needing a new glibc that badly.


Cheers,
Kelly Clowers


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/CAFoWM=8ebfvatzrtn47ruxuoaamdpzc0f+tf5tcbgrkcj-r...@mail.gmail.com

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Camaleón]

On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:

> On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 05:12:35PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
>> Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a
>> relatively recent version of glibc.

There always be some package that requires some version for some library. 
This loop can only be broken when using rolling-alike linux distributions 
(or you have the patience to do the manual job without breaking a current 
system).

>> Wheezy, the latest non-unstable version of Debian, is stuck at 2.13,
>> released 1.5 years ago, and since it is frozen there won't be a new
>> glibc available for some undetermined amount of time probably not less
>> than six months.

Sid also shares the same version since July, very recent.

>> So aside from waiting for jessie to exist, what are my options? 

Your options for "today"? Self-compiling. Your options for the long-term? 
Sticking to Sid.

>> Has anyone tried installing glibc from unstable in a Wheezy system? How
>> usable is sid, these days?

No, too dangerous to my taste.

> Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd
> have to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.
> 
> Really?
> 
> Developers: really?

The core of developers are not here.

> I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question
> would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc
> team, right?

Maybe there's a compelling reason for still using such "old" version of 
glibc but asking to people in charge is not going to do any bad.

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k2krae$77j$2...@ger.gmane.org

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Carl Fink]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 09:27:00AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 21:23:16 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > > 
> > > Maybe first read the thread starting at
> > > 
> > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html
> > 
> > A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug
> > against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team?
> 
> And a third mentions a bug is already opened.

And the bug is apparently going to sit unfixed until after Wheezy releases.
Leaving me still unable to get a semi-fresh glibc.
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910110234.ga26...@panix.com

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Brian]

On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 21:23:16 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> > 
> > Maybe first read the thread starting at
> > 
> >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html
> 
> A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug
> against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team?

And a third mentions a bug is already opened.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910082700.GW24280@desktop

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Carl Fink]

On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote:
> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> 
> > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have
> > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.
> > 
> > Really?
> > 
> > Developers: really?
> > 
> > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question
> > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team,
> > right?
> 
> Maybe first read the thread starting at
> 
>http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html

A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug
against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team?

Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy
releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as
my next years-worth of Linux?
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910012316.gb6...@panix.com

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Robert Wall]

On 09/09/2012 02:12 PM, Carl Fink wrote:
> Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a relatively
> recent version of glibc.

BOINC 7.0.27 migrated to wheezy about a month ago (and is thus listed on
http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=boinc ). Before then, I was
using the packaging from sid without any issues.

I can't address your wider question, but as a frequent user of
boinc-client, I figured I should point that out :)

-- 
Robert Wall 
OpenPGP: D722 7F0A F510 A3F7 8123  6382 B650 13A4 9375 5E08



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Brian]

On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote:

> Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have
> to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.
> 
> Really?
> 
> Developers: really?
> 
> I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question
> would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team,
> right?

Maybe first read the thread starting at

   http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120909235036.GV24280@desktop

Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Carl Fink]

On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 05:12:35PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote:
> Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a relatively
> recent version of glibc.
> 
> Wheezy, the latest non-unstable version of Debian, is stuck at 2.13,
> released 1.5 years ago, and since it is frozen there won't be a new glibc
> available for some undetermined amount of time probably not less than six
> months.
> 
> So aside from waiting for jessie to exist, what are my options? Has anyone
> tried installing glibc from unstable in a Wheezy system? How usable is sid,
> these days?

Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have
to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old.

Really?

Developers: really?

I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question
would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team,
right?
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120909230033.ga1...@panix.com

glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?

[Carl Fink]

Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a relatively
recent version of glibc.

Wheezy, the latest non-unstable version of Debian, is stuck at 2.13,
released 1.5 years ago, and since it is frozen there won't be a new glibc
available for some undetermined amount of time probably not less than six
months.

So aside from waiting for jessie to exist, what are my options? Has anyone
tried installing glibc from unstable in a Wheezy system? How usable is sid,
these days?

Thanks.
-- 
Carl Fink   nitpick...@nitpicking.com 

Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com.  Reviews!  Observations!
Stupid mistakes you can correct!


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120909211235.ga11...@panix.com

Re: security update glibc message

[Curt]

On 2012-06-08, Camaleón  wrote:
>> 
>> unopkg done.
>> *** glibc detected ***
>> /usr/lib/openoffice/program/../basis-link/program/../ure-link/bin/uno.bin: 
>> double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x7fdf68000fb0 *** 
>
> (...)
>
>> Don't know what it all means, but a brief google seems to indicate it's
>> them rather than me.
>
> I would report this in Debian BTS.
>
> Mmmm, there was a similar report opened:
>
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=593455

Yes, that looks like more or less the same thing; a problem with uno.bin
(whatever that is).

> Despite the backtrace, are you facing any problem with the OOo programs?

Abiword and gnumeric have sufficed thus far for my needs.  I haven't
used OO at all, so no problems to face.

Thanks.

> Greetings,
>
> -- 
> Camaleón
>
>


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnjt49vk.50g.cu...@einstein.electron.org

Re: security update glibc message

[Camaleón]

On Fri, 08 Jun 2012 10:00:00 +, Curt wrote:

> 31 updates today for me, running squeeze, the following message in my
> xterm at installation end:
> 
> unopkg done.
> *** glibc detected ***
> /usr/lib/openoffice/program/../basis-link/program/../ure-link/bin/uno.bin: 
> double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x7fdf68000fb0 *** 

(...)

> Don't know what it all means, but a brief google seems to indicate it's
> them rather than me.

I would report this in Debian BTS.

Mmmm, there was a similar report opened:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=593455

Despite the backtrace, are you facing any problem with the OOo programs?

Greetings,

-- 
Camaleón


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/jqt3bt$gke$7...@dough.gmane.org

security update glibc message

[Curt]

31 updates today for me, running squeeze, the following message in my
xterm at installation end:

unopkg done.
*** glibc detected *** 
/usr/lib/openoffice/program/../basis-link/program/../ure-link/bin/uno.bin: 
double free or corruption (fasttop): 0x7fdf68000fb0 ***
=== Backtrace: =
/lib/libc.so.6(+0x71bd6)[0x7fdf77d94bd6]
/lib/libc.so.6(cfree+0x6c)[0x7fdf77d9994c]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_cppu.so.3(+0x22f1e)[0x7fdf78afbf1e]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_cppu.so.3(+0x21a1d)[0x7fdf78afaa1d]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_cppu.so.3(+0x21c98)[0x7fdf78afac98]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_cppu.so.3(uno_threadpool_destroy+0x19)[0x7fdf78afb8a2]
/usr/lib/ure/lib/liburp_uno.so(+0x5037)[0x7fdf740a5037]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_cppu.so.3(+0x1ac54)[0x7fdf78af3c54]
/usr/lib/ure/lib/liburp_uno.so(+0x10a43)[0x7fdf740b0a43]
/usr/lib/ure/lib/liburp_uno.so(+0x10ac0)[0x7fdf740b0ac0]
/usr/lib/ure/lib/liburp_uno.so(+0x5fda)[0x7fdf740a5fda]
/usr/lib/ure/bin/../lib/libuno_sal.so.3(+0x2e7bc)[0x7fdf78d337bc]
/lib/libpthread.so.0(+0x68ca)[0x7fdf774c68ca]
/lib/libc.so.6(clone+0x6d)[0x7fdf77df292d]

=== Memory map: 
0040-00426000 r-xp  08:01 278005 
/usr/lib/ure/bin/uno.bin
00626000-00627000 rw-p 00026000 08:01 278005 
/usr/lib/ure/bin/uno.bin
00f13000-01261000 rw-p  00:00 0  [heap]
7fdf6800-7fdf68021000 rw-p  00:00 0 
7fdf68021000-7fdf6c00 ---p  00:00 0 
7fdf6f762000-7fdf6f763000 ---p  00:00 0 
7fdf6f763000-7fdf6ffa4000 rw-p  00:00 0 
7fdf6ffe5000-7fdf70026000 rw-p  00:00 0 
7fdf70026000-7fdf70027000 r-xp  08:01 278129 
/usr/lib/openoffice/basis3.2/program/pyuno.so
7fdf70027000-7fdf70226000 ---p 1000 08:01 278129 
/usr/lib/openoffice/basis3.2/program/pyuno.so
7fdf70226000-7fdf70227000 rw-p  08:01 278129 
/usr/lib/openoffice/basis3.2/program/pyuno.so
7fdf70227000-7fdf70233000 r-xp  08:01 278014 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/invocadapt.uno.so
7fdf70233000-7fdf70433000 ---p c000 08:01 278014 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/invocadapt.uno.so
7fdf70433000-7fdf70434000 rw-p c000 08:01 278014 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/invocadapt.uno.so
7fdf70434000-7fdf70455000 r-xp  08:01 278471 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/reflection.uno.so
7fdf70455000-7fdf70655000 ---p 00021000 08:01 278471 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/reflection.uno.so
7fdf70655000-7fdf70658000 rw-p 00021000 08:01 278471 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/reflection.uno.so
7fdf70658000-7fdf70679000 r-xp  08:01 278013 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/introspection.uno.so
7fdf70679000-7fdf70879000 ---p 00021000 08:01 278013 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/introspection.uno.so
7fdf70879000-7fdf7087b000 rw-p 00021000 08:01 278013 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/introspection.uno.so
7fdf7087b000-7fdf70898000 r-xp  08:01 278475 
/usr/lib/ure/lib/stocservices.uno.so
7fdf70898000-7fdf70a98000 ---p 0001d000 08:01 278475 
/usr/lProcessing triggers for menu ...

Don't know what it all means, but a brief google seems to indicate it's
them rather than me.





-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/slrnjt3j9t.3tr.cu...@einstein.electron.org

glibc blowfish support an PureFTPD

[Mario Kleinsasser]

Hello list,

currently I'am migrating a PureFTPD ftp server installed on old SuSE to
Debian Squeeze.
The passwords in the SuSE pureftpd.passwd are hashed with crypt() blowfish.

As I read ahead it seems like that Debians glibc isn't supporting blowfish
via crypt(), but the source code of pureftpd uses it (blowfish tested
first). I know that I could install pam_unix2.so to enable blowfish shadow
passwords but that is not the target in this case.

I tried this with a short copied code hack from the net:
---
#include 
#include 
#include 

int
main (int _, char *argv[])
{
printf ("%s\n", crypt (argv[1], argv[2]));
return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}
--

Here the outputs from the tests:
DES (OK):
./testcrypt foo 'abcdefgh'
abQ9KY.KfrYrc

MD5 (OK):
./testcrypt foo '$1$abcdefgh'
$1$abcdefgh$XxzGe9Muun7wTYbZO4sdr0

SHA256 (OK):
./testcrypt foo '$5$abcdefgh'
$5$abcdefgh$CW45LGaOXvr/s.wV2oa1hJQDggNQ2Q.kmtERKd8vfa6

SHA512 (OK):
./testcrypt foo '$6$abcdefgh'
$6$abcdefgh$j0MVxgmPHdViHdU0fAVeXckk8X1/NT/aW8qH8f/E9EOXiODjOVOMxvfuGhvV3BoHalJReG2ivQ7nqTG.TS54n.

BLOWFISH (NOT OK, seems like plain DES?):
./testcrypt foo '$2a$07$abcdefgh'
$2zJyhpjk3l9E

This doesn't work in neither salt version "$2$" "$2a$07" etc.

Here the installed version:
libc6  2.11.2-10

Any tips, hints how to migrate PureFTPD from SuSE without resetting all
Passwords?
Is Debian glibc really without blowfish support - only to be sure?

Mario


-- 
http://www.n0r1sk.com

Re: glibc too old to install Flash on Testing?

[Lorenzo Beretta]

JoeHill ha scritto:

What?

I've definitely never seen this before. I'm running a Testing system myself and
Flash works fine (well, to the extent that Flash can ever be said to work
'fine').

On a Testing system I just installed, however, I'm getting an error that:

ERROR: Your glibc library is older than 2.3.
   Please update your glibc library.

I've applied all updates since installing the system, so not too sure how I
could be out of date at this point. I tried just copying the libflashplayer.so
to .mozilla/plugins, but it is still not found by Iceweasel.

Any tips?

Thanks!



$ aptitude show ~nglibc | less
==> provided by libc6
$ aptitude show libc6
...
Version: 2.9-1

I'm using debian testing (on amd64 if you care about it), and have flash 
installed.
Really don't know how to help you - try posting your sources.list, my 
guess is that it's somehow screwed up. But it's just my guess.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: glibc too old to install Flash on Testing?

[Florian Kulzer]

On Wed, Jul 01, 2009 at 19:29:26 -0400, JoeHill wrote:
> 
> What?
> 
> I've definitely never seen this before. I'm running a Testing system myself 
> and
> Flash works fine (well, to the extent that Flash can ever be said to work
> 'fine').
> 
> On a Testing system I just installed, however, I'm getting an error that:
> 
> ERROR: Your glibc library is older than 2.3.
>Please update your glibc library.

When and how (console message, pop-up window, ...) do you get this error
message?

> I've applied all updates since installing the system, so not too sure how I
> could be out of date at this point. I tried just copying the libflashplayer.so
> to .mozilla/plugins, but it is still not found by Iceweasel.

What do you get from

ldd /full/path/to/your/copy/of/libflashplayer.so

?

-- 
Regards,| http://users.icfo.es/Florian.Kulzer
  Florian   |


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

glibc too old to install Flash on Testing?

[JoeHill]

What?

I've definitely never seen this before. I'm running a Testing system myself and
Flash works fine (well, to the extent that Flash can ever be said to work
'fine').

On a Testing system I just installed, however, I'm getting an error that:

ERROR: Your glibc library is older than 2.3.
   Please update your glibc library.

I've applied all updates since installing the system, so not too sure how I
could be out of date at this point. I tried just copying the libflashplayer.so
to .mozilla/plugins, but it is still not found by Iceweasel.

Any tips?

Thanks!

-- 
J


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

glibc install problem

[Thomas H. George]

The installation end in Error 2 as shown in the captured output included
below.

My system is Lenney with a 2.6.26-1-amd64 stock kernel.  I installed the
debian glibc-source_2.7-13.all.deb package, unpacked
glibc-2.7ds1.tar.bz2 into /usr/src/gnu/glibc-2.7, created
/usr/src/gnu/glibc-build and from this directory ran
../glibc-2.7/configure  --prefix=/usr
and then
env LANGUAGE=C LC_ALL=C make install

Output poured accross the console for a long time - an incredible amount
work must have gone into this - but finally stopped with the following
lines:

sdeps/generic/elf -I../sysdeps/generic -I../nptl  -I.. -I../libio -I.  -D_LIBC_
REENTRANT -include ../include/libc-symbols.h   -DNOT_IN_libc=1-o /usr/src/g
nu/glibc-build/elf/sprof.o -MD -MP -MF /usr/src/gnu/glibc-build/elf/sprof.o.dt 
-MT /usr/src/gnu/glibc-build/elf/sprof.o
make[2]: *** No rule to make target `/usr/src/gnu/glibc-build/dlfcn/libdl.so.2'
, needed by `/usr/src/gnu/glibc-build/elf/sprof'.  Stop.
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gnu/glibc-2.7/elf'
make[1]: *** [elf/subdir_install] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/gnu/glibc-2.7'
make: *** [install] Error 2
Phoenix:/usr/src/gnu/glibc-build#

I am unsure that I have done everything correctly.  The source package I
downloaded contained four .bz2 files and I have used only glibc-2.7ds1.
After expanding it into the glibc-2.7 directory I read the README and
INSTALL directions and tried to follow them carefully.  I did check that
I have the required versions or latter of all the necessary packages
listed in INSTALL.

I would appreciate any assistance in completing this install.

Tom


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian glibc package

[Kamaraju S Kusumanchi]

hce wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I am using linux-2.6-glibc23-i686 in FC6 box to compile audio and
> video application, what is the equivelant glibc I can use in Debian?
> 
> I searched following result, could not find similar glibc23 package.
> 
> $ apt-cache search glibc

Try something like
$apt-cache search --names-only glibc
glibc-doc - GNU C Library: Documentation
libc6-pic - GNU C Library: PIC archive library
libg++2.8.1.3-glibc2.2 - The GNU C++ extension library - runtime version
libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 - The GNU stdc++ library
glibc-doc-reference - GNU C Library: Documentation
libc6 - GNU C Library: Shared libraries

Basically, you are looking for libc6.

glibc = "GNU C Library". glibc 2.x in Linux uses the soname libc.so.6. The
soname is often abbreviated as libc6.

> How can I install the source code to a local rather than to /usr
> directory?

apt-get source package_name

The above command does not need any special permissions. You can unpack the
source code in any directory you wish.

You might also need another command such as
apt-get build-dep package_name

this will automatically install all the dependencies necessary for compiling
the package_name.

hth
raju
-- 
Kamaraju S Kusumanchi
http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/
http://malayamaarutham.blogspot.com/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Debian glibc package

[Ron Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 04/15/08 06:57, hce wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I am using linux-2.6-glibc23-i686 in FC6 box to compile audio and
> video application, what is the equivelant glibc I can use in Debian?
> 
> I searched following result, could not find similar glibc23 package.
> 
> $ apt-cache search glibc
[snip]
> libc6 - GNU C Library: Shared libraries

This is what you want.  And libc6-dev.

[snip]
> 
> How can I install the source code to a local rather than to /usr directory?



Isn't that controlled by what you pass to ./configure?

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

We want... a Shrubbery!!
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFIBJ3VS9HxQb37XmcRAhiDAKDOxWdFpQskfk84RFHVZ6Et4O/bbQCfbEo9
CvJHUfzWjQ0rvyl+ytc/Y0Q=
=y3cA
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Debian glibc package

[hce]

Hi,

I am using linux-2.6-glibc23-i686 in FC6 box to compile audio and
video application, what is the equivelant glibc I can use in Debian?

I searched following result, could not find similar glibc23 package.

$ apt-cache search glibc
abicheck - binary compatibility checking tool
glibc-doc - GNU C Library: Documentation
ja-trans - Japanese gettext message files
kmtrace - a KDE memory leak tracer
libc6 - GNU C Library: Shared libraries
libc6-pic - GNU C Library: PIC archive library
libdb1-compat - The Berkeley database routines [glibc 2.0/2.1 compatibility]
libg++2.8.1.3-glibc2.2 - The GNU C++ extension library - runtime version
libgetopt-java - GNU getopt - Java port
libggz-dev - GGZ Gaming Zone: common utilities library - development files
libggz2 - GGZ Gaming Zone: common utilities library
libnss-ldap - NSS module for using LDAP as a naming service
libnss-mdns - NSS module for Multicast DNS name resolution
libnss-pgsql1 - name service switch module using PostgreSQL
libstdc++2.10-glibc2.2 - The GNU stdc++ library
linux-kernel-headers - Linux Kernel Headers for development
linuxinfo - Displays extended system information
manpages-dev - Manual pages about using GNU/Linux for development
manpages-fr-dev - French version of the development manual pages
manpages-pl-dev - Polish man pages for developers
perdition-dev - Development libraries and headers for perdition
perdition-ldap - Library to allow perdition to access LDAP based popmaps
perdition-mysql - Library to allow perdition to access MySQL based popmaps
perdition-odbc - Library to allow perdition to access ODBC based popmaps
perdition-postgresql - Library to allow perdition to access PostgreSQL
based popmaps
python-utmp - python module for working with utmp
winbind - service to resolve user and group information from Windows NT servers
linux-libc-dev - Linux Kernel Headers for development

Search from google find
http://ftp.au.debian.org/debian/pool/main/g/glibc/glibc-source_2.7-10_all.deb

How can I install the source code to a local rather than to /usr directory?

Thank you.

Kind Regards,

Jim


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Richard Lyons]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:13:48AM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 10:14:54PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
[..]
> > 
> > As I said, I am at home with fdisk and parted.  And can boot from
> > knoppix and copy a whole partition off when I need to, whereas knoppix
> > doesn't seem to know about the lvm partitions.  Probably my lack of
> > knowledge, though: I am sure knoppix can mount the LVM in capable hands.
> > I expect I am just showing my age.
> 
> I've never bothered to figure out how to get a LiveCD to mount my LVM
> (some of which is sitting on top of raid1).  The way it works is that
> the kernel should boot.  If it doesn't, there's the installer CD in
> rescue mode.
> 
> Some filesystem types allow shrinking, others don't.  If you need to
> shrink one and the filesystem doesn't allow it, you have to create a new
> LV, put a new filesystem on it, move the data, and remove the old LV.
> 
> The best HOWTO is the LVM howto in the doc-linux package (from
> tldp.org).  The trick is to be aware of the layers and to resize things
> at the right layer.  Yes the concept is complicated, but the actual
> useage is rather magical.
> 
> Whatever floats your boat.

It really does seem that I shall have to find time to get round LVM some
day.  Thanks for your input, Doug.

-- 
richard


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 10:14:54PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 04:25:02PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> > 
> > What warnings did you get about LVM?  It is rather nice to be able to
> > resize partitions, but also migrate partitions of of failing drives.  On
> > all my old boxes (that are still new enough to run Debian), drive
> > failures start with wierd error messages.  Using LVM, I can migrate the
> > data onto more reliable drives, then stress-test the failing ones to
> > either get them working or just ditch them.
> 
> Yes it all sounds idyllic, which is why I allowed the installer to do
> its default thing and install lvm and choose its own partitioning -- I
> assumed it was simple to resize and extend later.  Then when I came to
> read the man pages and google for advice on the rather inscrutable
> commands to re-allocate the space between the partitions, there seemed
> to be warnings of terrible possible data losses.  I am sorry, but I
> don't remember the details.  I asked on this list and got little solace,
> tried to shrink one partition in order to expand another, and found that
> it was impossible, and gave up rather feebly.  Something like that,
> anyway.  
> 
> As I said, I am at home with fdisk and parted.  And can boot from
> knoppix and copy a whole partition off when I need to, whereas knoppix
> doesn't seem to know about the lvm partitions.  Probably my lack of
> knowledge, though: I am sure knoppix can mount the LVM in capable hands.
> I expect I am just showing my age.

I've never bothered to figure out how to get a LiveCD to mount my LVM
(some of which is sitting on top of raid1).  The way it works is that
the kernel should boot.  If it doesn't, there's the installer CD in
rescue mode.

Some filesystem types allow shrinking, others don't.  If you need to
shrink one and the filesystem doesn't allow it, you have to create a new
LV, put a new filesystem on it, move the data, and remove the old LV.

The best HOWTO is the LVM howto in the doc-linux package (from
tldp.org).  The trick is to be aware of the layers and to resize things
at the right layer.  Yes the concept is complicated, but the actual
useage is rather magical.

Whatever floats your boat.

Doug.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Richard Lyons]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 04:25:02PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:

> 
> What warnings did you get about LVM?  It is rather nice to be able to
> resize partitions, but also migrate partitions of of failing drives.  On
> all my old boxes (that are still new enough to run Debian), drive
> failures start with wierd error messages.  Using LVM, I can migrate the
> data onto more reliable drives, then stress-test the failing ones to
> either get them working or just ditch them.

Yes it all sounds idyllic, which is why I allowed the installer to do
its default thing and install lvm and choose its own partitioning -- I
assumed it was simple to resize and extend later.  Then when I came to
read the man pages and google for advice on the rather inscrutable
commands to re-allocate the space between the partitions, there seemed
to be warnings of terrible possible data losses.  I am sorry, but I
don't remember the details.  I asked on this list and got little solace,
tried to shrink one partition in order to expand another, and found that
it was impossible, and gave up rather feebly.  Something like that,
anyway.  

As I said, I am at home with fdisk and parted.  And can boot from
knoppix and copy a whole partition off when I need to, whereas knoppix
doesn't seem to know about the lvm partitions.  Probably my lack of
knowledge, though: I am sure knoppix can mount the LVM in capable hands.
I expect I am just showing my age.

-- 
richard


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 07:14:02PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:22:59PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> > On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:16:34PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
 
> > I hope you kept backups and if not, make a full set before you do
> > anything else.  That is, copy /home and /etc plus anything in
> > /usr/local, /var, /var/local, or /opt that you would want.  This sounds
> > like its spirilling towards a reinstall.  Sure it may be recoverable by
> > extraordinary measures, but a reinstall may be faster.
> 
> Yes, I think you are right.  yesterday I was in denial, but I'm getting
> used to the idea.  I'd better erase the LVM and repartition hda, then
> install etch cleanly and swap back in my /home, /usr/local, most of the
> rest of /usr, /var/www, ... and then copy selected bits of /etc too.
> It is not so much a question of backups, as most of the variable user
> data is already on separate partitions.  A pity.  It was running sweetly
> enough before.

What warnings did you get about LVM?  It is rather nice to be able to
resize partitions, but also migrate partitions of of failing drives.  On
all my old boxes (that are still new enough to run Debian), drive
failures start with wierd error messages.  Using LVM, I can migrate the
data onto more reliable drives, then stress-test the failing ones to
either get them working or just ditch them.

Doug.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Richard Lyons]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:22:59PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:

> On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:16:34PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
> > Silly situation:  I have been wanting to release my etch install from
> > the LVM so as to be able to adjust the partitioning.  The arrangement
[...]

> > Problem 1: How do I solve that?
>
> I don't know as you can.  When things are on an LV, the initrd is made
> to work with this.  When things are on normal partitons, the initrd is
> made to work with that.  The fix involves remaking the initrd but I have
> never done that.

That is exactly where I was, like a chroot install or a gentoo
install...

> > Problem 2: I had the bright idea to install another kernel while in the
> > chroot, and let the install make its own initrd.  I saw in aptitude that
>
> whilst you were in the midst of problem number 1?

Well, exactly because of it.  Usually a new kernel install makes a new
initrd, so I assumed it would bring enough tools to do so.

[...]
> > I am doing something daft, but what? (other than having tried to fix
> > something that wasn't broke).
>
> Yes.  I don't see why, if you're already on LVM and you need more space,
> you didn't just add the extra partition as a PV and add that to the VG

It looked very complicated and came with all sorts of warnings.  With
conventional partitions, I know where I am.  fdisk and parted are my
(old) friends.
[...]

> Is this a straight Etch (nothing else)?  If so, why would your perl need
> a non-existant libc6.

It was installed before etch became stable, and perhaps not quite up to
date.  It seems this must be the source of the problem.  Though nothing
else ever complained. And even sound worked -- which it doesn't under sid,
which I did just try out on another partition.  I always used to run
sid, years ago, but now looks like a tricky moment to go there -- quite
a few important (to me) things are broken.  It's okay if you are running
sid in a workable state, you can just wait your moment to update stuff,
but when you are going to jump in you are committed to a snapshot (or a
lot of work).

> I hope you kept backups and if not, make a full set before you do
> anything else.  That is, copy /home and /etc plus anything in
> /usr/local, /var, /var/local, or /opt that you would want.  This sounds
> like its spirilling towards a reinstall.  Sure it may be recoverable by
> extraordinary measures, but a reinstall may be faster.

Yes, I think you are right.  yesterday I was in denial, but I'm getting
used to the idea.  I'd better erase the LVM and repartition hda, then
install etch cleanly and swap back in my /home, /usr/local, most of the
rest of /usr, /var/www, ... and then copy selected bits of /etc too.
It is not so much a question of backups, as most of the variable user
data is already on separate partitions.  A pity.  It was running sweetly
enough before.

Thanks, Doug

--
richard

PS Apologies if duplicated.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 12:16:34PM +, Richard Lyons wrote:
> Silly situation:  I have been wanting to release my etch install from
> the LVM so as to be able to adjust the partitioning.  The arrangement
> was:

[snip: old LVM setup]  See my note at the bottom.

> /usr used also to be in the LVM, but I ran out of space so I simply
> Obviously /home and /tmp present no problems - I can simply copy them
> wherever I want and remount.
see my note at the bottom too.

 
> Problem 1: How do I solve that?

I don't know as you can.  When things are on an LV, the initrd is made
to work with this.  When things are on normal partitons, the initrd is
made to work with that.  The fix involves remaking the initrd but I have
never done that.  

> 
> Problem 2: I had the bright idea to install another kernel while in the
> chroot, and let the install make its own initrd.  I saw in aptitude that

whilst you were in the midst of problem number 1?

> linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 was available (the current kernel was
> 2.6.18-5-686). But this also failed to install, so I tried to remove it
> prior to finding the relevant glibc.  The removal failed too:
>  /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
>  found (required by /usr/bin/perl)
>  Selecting previously deselected package linux-image-2.6.18-6-686.
>  (Reading database ...
>  dpkg: serious warning: files list file for package
>  `linux-image-2.6.18-6-686' missing, assuming package has no files
>  currently installed.
>  183622 files and directories currently installed.)
>  Preparing to replace linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1
>  (using .../linux-image-2.6.18-6-686_2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1_i386.deb) ...
>  /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
>  found (required by /usr/bin/perl)
>  dpkg: error processing
>  
> /var/cache/apt/archives/linux-image-2.6.18-6-686_2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1_i386.deb
>  (--unpack):
>   subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 1
>   /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
>   found (required by /usr/bin/perl).
> 
> ...and now aptitude and apt are blocked from any further action.
> 
> I cannot see anything glibc-ish >2.3.6 in the package list.  Obviously,
> I am doing something daft, but what? (other than having tried to fix
> something that wasn't broke).

Yes.  I don't see why, if you're already on LVM and you need more space,
you didn't just add the extra partition as a PV and add that to the VG
then enlarge the LVs appropriately, then finally resize the filesystems
to match.  Simple (no, really it is simpler than describing).

Is this a straight Etch (nothing else)?  If so, why would your perl need
a non-existant libc6. 

I hope you kept backups and if not, make a full set before you do
anything else.  That is, copy /home and /etc plus anything in
/usr/local, /var, /var/local, or /opt that you would want.  This sounds
like its spirilling towards a reinstall.  Sure it may be recoverable by
extraordinary measures, but a reinstall may be faster.

Doug.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

mkinitrd and glibc version problem in etch

[Richard Lyons]

Hi all.

Silly situation:  I have been wanting to release my etch install from
the LVM so as to be able to adjust the partitioning.  The arrangement
was:
/dev/mapper/Debian-root on / type ext3 (rw,errors=remount-ro)
/dev/hda1 on /boot type ext3 (rw)
/dev/mapper/Debian-home on /home type ext3 (rw)
/dev/mapper/Debian-tmp on /tmp type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hdb2 on /usr type ext3 (rw)
/dev/mapper/Debian-var on /var type ext3 (rw)
/dev/hdb2 on /usr type ext3 (rw)

/usr used also to be in the LVM, but I ran out of space so I simply
copied to hdb (which is 80GB, against 20GB of hda).
Obviously /home and /tmp present no problems - I can simply copy them
wherever I want and remount.

I decided to copy the root partition and var to two new partitons on
hdb, then mount the new root to /mnt/hdb13 (or whatever) and mount all
the other filesystems into that, mount -o bind /dev /mnt/hdb13, and
mount -t proc none /mnt/hdb13 so as to be able to chroot there and make
a new initrd.  But this gave me
 # mkinitramfs -o boot/initrd.img-2.6.18-5-686r -r /dev/hdb13 2.6.18-5-686
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)
 locale: Cannot set LC_ALL to default locale: No such file or directory
 find: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not found
 (required by find)

Problem 1: How do I solve that?

Problem 2: I had the bright idea to install another kernel while in the
chroot, and let the install make its own initrd.  I saw in aptitude that
linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 was available (the current kernel was
2.6.18-5-686). But this also failed to install, so I tried to remove it
prior to finding the relevant glibc.  The removal failed too:
 /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
 found (required by /usr/bin/perl)
 Selecting previously deselected package linux-image-2.6.18-6-686.
 (Reading database ...
 dpkg: serious warning: files list file for package
 `linux-image-2.6.18-6-686' missing, assuming package has no files
 currently installed.
 183622 files and directories currently installed.)
 Preparing to replace linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1
 (using .../linux-image-2.6.18-6-686_2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1_i386.deb) ...
 /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
 found (required by /usr/bin/perl)
 dpkg: error processing
 /var/cache/apt/archives/linux-image-2.6.18-6-686_2.6.18.dfsg.1-18etch1_i386.deb
 (--unpack):
  subprocess pre-installation script returned error exit status 1
  /usr/bin/perl: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.4' not
  found (required by /usr/bin/perl).

...and now aptitude and apt are blocked from any further action.

I cannot see anything glibc-ish >2.3.6 in the package list.  Obviously,
I am doing something daft, but what? (other than having tried to fix
something that wasn't broke).

--
richard

PS apologies if this gets duplicated, but the list is apparently blocking 
my mail so I had to resend port-forwarded to another server.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: using 32bit glibc/libgcc on a 64bit machine

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Thu, Jan 24, 2008 at 07:00:53AM -0800, Morfys wrote:
> I would like to copy glibc/libgcc (in particular, libc.so.
> 6,libgcc_s.so.1) for a 32bit machine onto a 64bit machine.  Would
> using the 32bit glibc/libgcc on the 64bit machine work?
> The reason I ask is that I've been getting the following error:
> 
> Bin/libc.so.6: symbol _dl_out_of_memory, version GLIBC_PRIVATE not
> defined in file ld-linux.so.2 with link time reference

If you're in Etch amd64, there is a 32-bit libs package.

As for your error message, I don't know.

Doug.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

using 32bit glibc/libgcc on a 64bit machine

[Morfys]

Hi,
I would like to copy glibc/libgcc (in particular, libc.so.
6,libgcc_s.so.1) for a 32bit machine onto a 64bit machine.  Would
using the 32bit glibc/libgcc on the 64bit machine work?
The reason I ask is that I've been getting the following error:

Bin/libc.so.6: symbol _dl_out_of_memory, version GLIBC_PRIVATE not
defined in file ld-linux.so.2 with link time reference

and wonder if the above is the main issue.
Thanks.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GLIBC 2.4 for Debian Etch

[Deng Xiyue]

Sven Joachim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> On 2008-01-11 23:37 +0100, David Fox wrote:
>
>> On 1/11/08, Kum Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Does somebody know something easy method of upgrading GLIBC to version 2.4
>>> from 2.3.6 without upgrading Etch to Lenny?
>>
>> I don't see it - and likely there would be too many breakages.
>
> Um, could you elaborate _what_ is going to break?  Upgrading the glibc
> requires an update of a few other packages that do not work with newer
> versions (locales, tzdata, libc6-dev), but that's it.  After all, if you
> dist-upgrade to a newer Debian version, libc6 is usually one of the first
> packages that are upgraded, and a breakage in the middle of an upgrade
> because of the newer libc6 is not something that happens very often.
>

I've got some answers in IRC from dondelelcaro some time ago. Briefly,
one of the reason for Etch to ship glibc 2.3.6 instead of newer ones
is it's the last glibc that supports 2.4 Linux kernel, which Etch
supports. Lenny won't make that promise, so it got updated.

>> You're
>> better off doing a dist-upgrade to lenny.
>
> Which involves its own risk of breakages.  I would rather suggest apt
> pinning, as described in http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning.
>
> Sven


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GLIBC 2.4 for Debian Etch

[Sven Joachim]

On 2008-01-11 23:37 +0100, David Fox wrote:

> On 1/11/08, Kum Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Does somebody know something easy method of upgrading GLIBC to version 2.4
>> from 2.3.6 without upgrading Etch to Lenny?
>
> I don't see it - and likely there would be too many breakages.

Um, could you elaborate _what_ is going to break?  Upgrading the glibc
requires an update of a few other packages that do not work with newer
versions (locales, tzdata, libc6-dev), but that's it.  After all, if you
dist-upgrade to a newer Debian version, libc6 is usually one of the first
packages that are upgraded, and a breakage in the middle of an upgrade
because of the newer libc6 is not something that happens very often.

> You're
> better off doing a dist-upgrade to lenny.

Which involves its own risk of breakages.  I would rather suggest apt
pinning, as described in http://wiki.debian.org/AptPinning.

Sven


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: GLIBC 2.4 for Debian Etch

[David Fox]

On 1/11/08, Kum Gabor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Does somebody know something easy method of upgrading GLIBC to version 2.4
> from 2.3.6 without upgrading Etch to Lenny?

I don't see it - and likely there would be too many breakages. You're
better off doing a dist-upgrade to lenny.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

GLIBC 2.4 for Debian Etch

[Kum Gabor]

Hello!

Does somebody know something easy method of upgrading GLIBC to version 2.4 
from 2.3.6 without upgrading Etch to Lenny?

thanks,

-- 
Kum Gabor
www.kumgabor.hu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Glibc? (SiS671/ SiS672 driver on Etch)

[Kum Gabor]

On Thursday 10 January 2008 22:04, Ron Johnson wrote:
> On 01/10/08 12:56, Kum Gabor wrote:
> > Hello All!
> >
> > I tried to set up my SiS672 video on my Fujitsu-Siemens Esprimo v5515
> > notebook. I found a driver for Ubuntu, but I have the following problem:
> >
> > dlopen: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version 'GLIBC_2.4' not found
> > (required by /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/sis_drv.so)
> >
> > (Libc version on Etch is 2.3.6.)
> > How can I use this driver? There is no source available :(
>
> Upgrade to Lenny?

I need stable system. And in Lenny has no 2.4 Libc too. Or is newer version 
good too, what do you think?
Or upgrade only Libc? Is it possible?

-- 
Kum Gabor
Tel.(RU): +7 921 870 2505
Tel.(HU): +36 20 447 4401
Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Web: www.kumgabor.hu
ICQ: 312292075


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Glibc? (SiS671/ SiS672 driver on Etch)

[Ron Johnson]

On 01/10/08 12:56, Kum Gabor wrote:

Hello All!

I tried to set up my SiS672 video on my Fujitsu-Siemens Esprimo v5515 
notebook. I found a driver for Ubuntu, but I have the following problem:


dlopen: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version 'GLIBC_2.4' not found (required
by /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/sis_drv.so)

(Libc version on Etch is 2.3.6.)
How can I use this driver? There is no source available :(


Upgrade to Lenny?

--
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

"I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian
because I hate vegetables!"
unknown


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Glibc? (SiS671/ SiS672 driver on Etch)

[Kum Gabor]

Hello All!

I tried to set up my SiS672 video on my Fujitsu-Siemens Esprimo v5515 
notebook. I found a driver for Ubuntu, but I have the following problem:

dlopen: /lib/tls/i686/cmov/libc.so.6: version 'GLIBC_2.4' not found (required
by /usr/lib/xorg/modules/drivers/sis_drv.so)

(Libc version on Etch is 2.3.6.)
How can I use this driver? There is no source available :(

Regards,

-- 
Kum Gabor
www.kumgabor.hu


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Libc6 anf glibc. Whats the difference ?

[Ron Johnson]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

On 11/22/07 09:14, Daniel Santos wrote:
> I searched packages.debian.org and the description is similar. GNU C

$ apt-cache show glibc
W: Unable to locate package glibc
E: No packages found


> library. Why are they different packages ?

libc6 *is* glibc, but is called libc6 because it came about as a
major revision to the glibc that was named libc5.  Many (5-6) years ago.

- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA  USA

%SYSTEM-F-FISH, my hovercraft is full of eels
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFHRZ58S9HxQb37XmcRAmewAKDJmEAQ3mWT1EUjA5BoIK7IMV3BTwCeI49Q
NK+ANbVLxRQJ15rE6iMp+BA=
=MFnu
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Libc6 anf glibc. Whats the difference ?

[Daniel Santos]

I searched packages.debian.org and the description is similar. GNU C 
library. Why are they different packages ?



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: trouble building glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2

[Michelle Konzack]

Am 2007-05-24 15:13:28, schrieb Roberto C. Sánchez:
> Why on earth would you update glibc without just upgrading the rest of
> the system?

The half system conflict with 2.5 and an "apt-get dist-update" will
leave your system unusable...  it remove dpkg before glibc 2.5 is
installed! -- Oops!

And of course, I had problem with my Self-Cooked 2.6.21 and glibc 2.5.

:-/

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant


-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
# Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917  ICQ #328449886
   50, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
0033/6/6192519367100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)


signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature

Re: trouble building glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2

[Tshepang Lekhonkhobe]

On 5/24/07, Tshepang Lekhonkhobe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> A combo of Etch & Sid?  Yech.  Definite recipe for trouble.
>
> Are you trying to build Sid source debs on Etch?  That *might* work,
> but why not then just move to Sid?

I'm trying to, but via the way of the source. I don't have binary
packages available. I'll proceed with the question again after a
while.


I gave up on the recursive non-sense and went on to download enough
binary packages to be able to build glibc from source. Thanks for your
attempts at helping me.

--
my place on the web:
floss-and-misc.blogspot.com


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: trouble building glibc-2.5 and gcc-4.1.2

[Roberto C . Sánchez]

On Thu, May 24, 2007 at 07:27:53PM +0200, Michelle Konzack wrote:
> 
> I had the same problem with my Devel-Station and my Laptop to get
> glibc 2.5 running.  It took me over 2 days to get all dependencies
> in the right order.
> 
Why on earth would you update glibc without just upgrading the rest of
the system?

Regards,

-Roberto

-- 
Roberto C. Sánchez
http://people.connexer.com/~roberto
http://www.connexer.com


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature