[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problem when upgrading to GLIBC 2.2.5
From: |
Andreas Jaeger |
Subject: |
Re: Problem when upgrading to GLIBC 2.2.5 |
Date: |
Fri, 24 May 2002 20:00:48 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090007 (Oort Gnus v0.07) XEmacs/21.4 (Artificial Intelligence, i386-suse-linux) |
Frank Krauss <address@hidden> writes:
> Hello Andreas,
>
> I decided to follow your advice concerning this problem.
> I updated my Binutils to 2.12 which went fine.
>
> I then restarted the upgrade of GLIBC to 2.2.5 from scratch.
> The configure options that I used were the following:
> --enable-add-ons
> --with-headers=/usr/src/linux/include
> --prefix=/usr
>
> The configure and make both went fine.
> During the "make check" is where I got the following message:
> /elf/filter: error while loading shared libraries: libgcc_s.so.1: cannot
> open shared object file: No such file or directory
>
> This file "libgcc_s.so.1" does exist on my System.
> it resides in /usr/local/lib and was installed as part of my upgrade
> of GCC to 3.0.4.
>
> While searching the Net for this message, I came across a similar
> problem from a Mark Kettenis around 10/1. His description was:-
> Conserning GCC-3.0.1 can't compile Glibc-2.2.4
>
> This appears to be practicaly the same problem as mine since I'm
> using GCC 3.0.4 to compile Glibc-2.2.5.
GCC 3.0.4 should work fine with glibc 2.2.5.
> His problem had something to do with DWARF-2 opcodes and was very
> technical. Unfortunately for me, no one in the Thread gave any mention
> of how to correct or get around this problem.
It was fixed - and it was really involved.
> I have enclosed the last lines from the Console output.
I think you can continue, if you check that libgcc_s.so.1 can really
be found. Try ldd libc.so.6 in your build directory - if this works,
I would say, go ahead.
>
> If you would, could you please tell me what I have to do to continue
> with my Upgrade of Glibc?
>
> Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated by me since I
> see your name mentioned all over the Net as an expert in GLIBC matters.
>
> Yours truly,
>
> Frank Krauss
>
> P.S.
> Andreas Schwab from your Company sent me a note describing the
> cause of my original Error 139 message as being made by the famous
> Signal 11 problem.
> Please thank him for me for giving me this information.
> The only thing strange about this is that when I looked in my
> /var/log/message file, I could see no mention of a Signal 11 problem.
NO, you misunderstood him. Signal 11 can come from any process and it
will never be displayed in /var/log/messages,
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs address@hidden
private address@hidden
http://www.suse.de/~aj