Date: Sun, 14 May 2006 00:25:26 +0800 From: mag@intron.ac To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Mozilla-linux-gtk1 doesn't work with linux-xorg-libs Message-ID: <20060514143048.76DECF0D2B@smtp.263.net> In-Reply-To: <82026267@srv.sem.ipt.ru> References: <200605121602.k4CG2BrS074784@secure.cfins.au.tsinghua.edu.cn> <26677501@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <courier.44654F43.00004327@intron.ac> <82026267@srv.sem.ipt.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Actually, I had tried "truss". But when I saw mozilla-bin hung up by ioctl(4, FIOREAD, ...) after much output, I felt lost. Experience is so important. Boris Samorodov wrote: > On Sat, 13 May 2006 11:15:15 +0800 mag@intron.ac wrote: > >> The RPM "xorg-x11-deprecated-libs" takes its effects! Both >> Firefox-linux-gtk2 1.0.7 and Mozilla-linux-gtk1 work now. Thanks, Boris. > > Glad to hear it. Thank you for your feedback. > >> Actually, quite a few days ago, I had found that Firefox-linux-gtk2 >> 1.0.7 reported that it requires "libXp.so.*" while Mozilla-linux-gtk1 >> hung up quietly only. But since I prefer Mozilla-linux-gtk1 for its better >> display of both oriental and western language fonts and eager to solve it, >> I ignored Firefox-linux-gtk2 1.0.7's prompt. > >> Boris, could you tell me how you found that Mozilla-linux-gtk1 also >> needs "libXp.so.*" though it keeps quiet for that? It seems that only >> "libgfxxprint.so" and "libgfx_gtk.so" needs "libXp.so.*". On the other >> hand "firefox-bin" (version 1.0.7) needs "libXp.so.*" itself and dynamic >> linker can report on lacking of "libXp.so.*". > > I used ktrace/kdump and realized that bad things did occure when > libXp.so was not found. Then I used google with "libxp.so" > keyword. Second link was to the fedoracore forum where the problem > (since FC3) and the solution was showed. Then it wasn't too hard to > find the needed rpm at MASTER_SITE_FEDORA_LINUX. ;-) > >> I have modified Boris's patch to avoid forcing user to install >> source RPM. See attachment in this mail. > > Actually, yes, the patch I sent you was not very clean. First of all I > tried to solve the problem to you, and the patch was not intended to > go to CVS without cleaning. > > I cleaned it and was waiting for your feedback to send my cleaned > version of the patch to Alexander. Now I'm doing it. > > Mag, your patch is good. Hence, you may not use "if defined > PACKAGE_BUILDING" because it is already at bsd.linux-rpm.mk. > >> Alexander, I believe you may commit Boris's patch now. > > Alexander, here is the patch I propose to commit. > >> P.S. current "x11/linux-xorg-libs" is just from Fedora Core 4 while >> the focused port "emulators/linux_base-fc3" is part of Fedora Core 3. > > Yea, now I understand what did you mean by "(FC3 and 4)". > > > WBR > -- > Boris B. Samorodov, Research Engineer > InPharmTech Co, http://www.ipt.ru > Telephone & Internet Service Provider ------------------------------------------------------------------------ From Beijing, China
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060514143048.76DECF0D2B>