Stephen Gran on 7 Mar 2006 15:56:35 -0000


[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: [PLUG] glibc problem?


On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 10:05:23AM -0500,
Daniel.G.Roberts@sanofi-aventis.com said:
> Hello All
> 
> Can anyone please help me sort out the problem below in regards to
> glibc.  I have two system that are running the same version of glibc
> 2.3.2

They are in fact, not the same version.  See below.

> On one system though gmond of ganglia systems monitor refuses to start
> correctly as shown below..  Any pointers would be most helpful!
> Thanks Dan
> 
> Starting GANGLIA gmond: /usr/sbin/gmond: relocation error:
> /usr/sbin/gmond: symbol sys_siglist, version GLIBC_2.3.3 not defined
> in file libc.so.6 with link time reference [FAILED]

glibc uses something called 'versioned symbols' - basically this means
that when you want to use a c library function in one of your
applications, the compiler and linker find it in the c library and link
to it, and also link in the version of the function used.  So you'll be
linking to printf@glibc.2.3.2 instead of just linking to printf.  Very
nice, and I wish more libraries did it.

However, clearly a symbol (sys_siglist) was either introduced or had
it's version changed between the two versions of the c library you have
installed.  One system has glibc-2.3.2-27.9.7 and the other has
glibc-2.3.2-95.20.  The correct approach really would have been for
gmond to depend on the newer version of the c library if it uses those
new symbols, but I guess not.

The simplest solution for you is probably ro rebuild gmond from source
on the older machine.  Your only other choice is to upgrade libc to the
same version as the one on the working box, but that risks breaking
quite a few other things.

> I have another system which supports the same version gmond using a
> slightly different version of glibc as shown below..  How can I get
> the above system working correctly without upgrading to glibc 2.3.3?!
> I noted that my working system below has the glibc-headers rpm
> installed while my failing system doesn't.  Might this be the problem?

No.
-- 
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
|  Stephen Gran                  | BOFH excuse #158:  Defunct processes    |
|  steve@lobefin.net             |                                         |
|  http://www.lobefin.net/~steve |                                         |
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug