From owner-freebsd-questions Mon Feb 16 19:21:29 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id TAA15257 for freebsd-questions-outgoing; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 19:21:29 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from localhost.zilker.net (jump-x2-1062.jumpnet.com [207.8.67.62]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id TAA15250 for ; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 19:21:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from marquard@zilker.net) Received: (from marquard@localhost) by localhost.zilker.net (8.8.8/8.8.3) id VAA06731; Mon, 16 Feb 1998 21:21:07 -0600 (CST) To: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: running the same binaries on 2.2 and 3.0 References: <9802161909.AA00769@gnu.sdsp.mc.xerox.com> From: Dave Marquardt Date: 16 Feb 1998 21:20:36 -0600 In-Reply-To: "Marty Leisner"'s message of "Mon, 16 Feb 1998 11:09:14 PST" Message-ID: <85d8gm533v.fsf@localhost.zilker.net> Lines: 22 X-Mailer: Quassia Gnus v0.22/XEmacs 19.16 - "Lille" Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Marty Leisner" writes: > I have some programs (like gnu fileutils) on a common area I want to > share between 3.0 and 2.2 (I compiled them on 3.0). > > On a 2.2 system (10/14/96 snap) I get: > > bash-2.01# mv kernel /kernel.none > /usr/libexec/ld.so: Undefined symbol "_lchown" called from mv:mv at 0xe0e4 > > The copy worked, the unlink didn't. > > Should this happen? I don't know about "should", but in my mind, a program compiled on 3.0 needn't run on 2.2. But a binary built on 2.2 really ought to run on 3.0, if we're to have any inkling of binary compatibility between versions. So my advice is to build the program on 2.2 and try running it on 3.0 and see if that works. -Dave To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message