| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
bfgeshka
n00b
Joined: 12 May 2018
Posts: 1
|
 Posted: Sat May 12, 2018 11:39 am Post subject: libdrm is compiled with both x86 and amd64 as amd64 |
 |
|
| Code: |
~/ file /usr/lib64/libdrm.so.2.4.0
/usr/lib64/libdrm.so.2.4.0: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, with debug_info, not stripped
~/ file /usr/lib32/libdrm.so.2.4.0
/usr/lib32/libdrm.so.2.4.0: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, with debug_info, not stripped
|
Tried different versions of libdrm. also compiled with different versions of GCC (6, 7, 8).
So, what can it be? Build system bug? I've built some not-so-important library in multilib for checking this issue and it was fine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bec
Apprentice
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 220
Location: Cali - Colombia
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ct85711
Veteran
Joined: 27 Sep 2005
Posts: 1791
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 3:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The 17.1 profile is considered experimental, and IS NOT recommended to use; the profile that should be used at this time is the 17.0. There has been some known instances that the 17.1 profile has broke the system. Migrating away from the 17.1 profile, is mostly an uncharted path (if it is even supported; though detailed information how to may be helpful for others). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 3:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bec wrote: | | It seems you have the old layout and you have not migrated to the 17.1 profile: |
It is just not recommanded to do so, first because it is experimental, and user problem just exhibit it is not for him, and second because your assumption about old layout deprecation is quiet premature!
In a 17.1 profile you have no /usr/lib32, /usr/lib is for 32bits and /usr/lib64 for 64bits
In a 17.0 profile you have /usr/lib32, /usr/lib is symlink to /usr/lib64 and /usr/lib64 hold 64bits
So there's a way that user mistake endup with missing the 32bits build (17.1 profile while /usr/lib is still a symlink to /usr/lib64, endup with system trying to put 32bits in /usr/lib, they endup in /usr/lib64 instead, and are crush by next multilib build that build and store the 64bits version properly in /usr/lib64) : this way you endup with 64bits version in both /usr/lib and /usr/lib64
For me, user has migrate to 17.1 profile and has came back from it, /usr/lib32 was destroy by the migration, and user has recreate /usr/lib32 by making it a symlink to /usr/lib or /usr/lib64 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bec
Apprentice
Joined: 30 Sep 2004
Posts: 220
Location: Cali - Colombia
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am sorry for the misguidance, maybe the 17.0 profile, not the 17.1!
_________________
abe |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Desktop Environments
