From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 10 06:55:43 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03944106566B for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:43 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (gate6.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:2001:8b0:151:1::1]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8D1308FC1C for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) Received: from happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2A6tZpV036991; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:36 GMT (envelope-from m.seaman@infracaninophile.co.uk) X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.5.0 smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk m2A6tZpV036991 Message-ID: <47D4DB60.1000901@infracaninophile.co.uk> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:28 +0000 From: Matthew Seaman Organization: Infracaninophile User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080302) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "E. J. Cerejo" References: <47D47CFD.7000001@palaceofretention.ca> <20080309225258.22232a58.ejcerejo@optonline.net> <47D4AFD6.5020401@palaceofretention.ca> <20080310000046.6b0d9bc0.ejcerejo@optonline.net> In-Reply-To: <20080310000046.6b0d9bc0.ejcerejo@optonline.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig13FE3DF99F946E8C7366A034" X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-3.0 (smtp.infracaninophile.co.uk [IPv6:::1]); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:37 +0000 (GMT) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6188/Sun Mar 9 19:28:13 2008 on happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,NO_RELAYS autolearn=ham version=3.2.4 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.4 (2008-01-01) on happy-idiot-talk.infracaninophile.co.uk Cc: freebsd-questions , Vinny Subject: Re: How did references to libc.so.7 get in my 6.3 ports? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 06:55:43 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig13FE3DF99F946E8C7366A034 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable E. J. Cerejo wrote: > On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 23:49:42 -0400 > Vinny wrote: >=20 >> E. J. Cerejo wrote: >>> On Sun, 09 Mar 2008 20:12:45 -0400 Vinny >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hello Everyone, >>>> >>>> I was trying to use portupgrade on totem and ran into a problem >>>> with references for libc.so.7 failing to resolve. I have a >>>> libc.so.6, of course, seeing as libc.so.7 is for FreeBSD 7, isn't >>>> it? >>>> >>>> uname -a FreeBSD the.pal...ofretention.ca 6.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD >>>> 6.3-PRERELEASE #0: Wed Jan 16 09:32:16 EST 2008=20 >>>> root@the.pal...ofretention.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/THE i386 >>>> >> [snip] >> >> >>> You updated the port that put libc.so.6 in your system, you need to >>> find out which port it came from and then find out which which ports >>> depend on it and rebuild them also and then the problem will be >>> fixed. I use /usr/ports/sysutils/bsdadminscripts which tells me >>> exactly which ports need to be rebuilt. >> >> Hi E. J., >> >> Is it true that a port put libc.so.6 in my system? >> I thought it was part of the base system (i.e. the world as in >> buildworld). >> >> I'm a bit (more) confused now. libc.so.6 is part of the base system. > Then you're running FreeBSD 6.x and you updated your ports tree after > FreeBSD 7.0 release. The latest ports tree no longer supports 6.x I > believe. So you should upgrade to 7 release or stable. Utter twaddle. The ports tree certainly does still support 6.x. To the OP: yes, your initial thought that libc.so.6 comes with RELENG_6_X and libc.so.7 is part of anything RELENG_7_X -- that is completely correct. If you're running a 6.x machine, then nothing should be linking against libc.so.7 -- that sort of forward compatibility is not possible. (Unlike= the inverse case, where you can have applications linked against a 6.x world running under 7.x). I suspect that what has happened is that you've inadvertently installed packages compiled for release 7.0 on a 6.3 system -- which as you've foun= d, does not work. This is a problem that can *only* occur with pre-compiled= packages. If you build the software out of ports directly on your 6.3 machines, it will automatically have the correct linkage to libc.so.6. =20 Note that you may need to rebuild applications further up the dependency tree than just the particular one you pointed out: shlibs and loadable modules can depend on other shlibs in as arbitrarily complex a fashion as= you can imagine. Cheers, Matthew --=20 Dr Matthew J Seaman MA, D.Phil. 7 Priory Courtyard Flat 3 PGP: http://www.infracaninophile.co.uk/pgpkey Ramsgate Kent, CT11 9PW --------------enig13FE3DF99F946E8C7366A034 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.8 (FreeBSD) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEAREIAAYFAkfU22cACgkQ8Mjk52CukIycMACghDzX0kyxT09bhRanSyhgmc/N 6ZUAmwbYVyMOfmO1w9992wdoDRudA0oI =uz5N -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig13FE3DF99F946E8C7366A034--