This may be a tad O.T., but I have to ask somebody. In compiling WRF model, everything seems to build but at runtime, I get this error message:
real.exe: /usr/pgi/linux86-64/6.0/lib/libpthread.so.0: version `GLIBC_2.3.3' not found (required by /lib64/tls/librt.so.1)
There appears to be something missing from the library, but not being smart enough to know what each one provides, nor know how to look at it, I'd sure like some pointers if anyone cares to help. If you need more info, I'd be happy to go offnet with it.
Sam
Sam Drinkard wrote:
real.exe: /usr/pgi/linux86-64/6.0/lib/libpthread.so.0: version `GLIBC_2.3.3' not found (required by /lib64/tls/librt.so.1)
Do you have the compat-glibc rpms installed ?
rpm -qa |grep compat-glibc compat-glibc-headers-2.3.2-95.30 compat-glibc-2.3.2-95.30
-Jay
Hi Jay,
Just double checked, and rpm *says* they are installed, but if I can find them. Where are the compat libs located in the tree. I'll do a manual search. If they are not there, that won't be the first time that rpm has lied to me on libraries being installed.
Hilliard, Jay wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
real.exe: /usr/pgi/linux86-64/6.0/lib/libpthread.so.0: version `GLIBC_2.3.3' not found (required by /lib64/tls/librt.so.1)
Do you have the compat-glibc rpms installed ?
rpm -qa |grep compat-glibc compat-glibc-headers-2.3.2-95.30 compat-glibc-2.3.2-95.30
-Jay
CentOS mailing list CentOS@centos.org http://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Hi Jay,
Just double checked, and rpm *says* they are installed, but if I can find them. Where are the compat libs located in the tree. I'll do a manual search. If they are not there, that won't be the first time that rpm has lied to me on libraries being installed.
Have you done rpm -ql packagename? That will tell you where all the files are installed. I've had RPM fail on a corrupted database before (but it was easily rebuilt) but never had it lie about packages that aren't there.
Hi Tim,
Well, this makes the 2nd or 3rd time I've had libs not installed that the database says are installed. When I set this system up, I knew I'd be needing some of the backwards compatible libraries, and installed everything I could find. This one however, the 2.3.3 is NOT installed as of yet, and not sure it's in the compat libs in the first place. Googling came up wiht some odd places to find it, but none were for the centos build, or even rh for that matter. I don't recall the name, but I thought linux libraries were all pretty much the same across the various flavors. I suppose not.
And the rpm-ql..... it gives the location of the compat libs, but again, it's not finding the 2.3.3 version, and until it does, this software will not run.
Tim Edwards wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Hi Jay,
Just double checked, and rpm *says* they are installed, but if I can find them. Where are the compat libs located in the tree. I'll do a manual search. If they are not there, that won't be the first time that rpm has lied to me on libraries being installed.
Have you done rpm -ql packagename? That will tell you where all the files are installed. I've had RPM fail on a corrupted database before (but it was easily rebuilt) but never had it lie about packages that aren't there.
Sam Drinkard wrote:
Hi Tim,
Well, this makes the 2nd or 3rd time I've had libs not installed that the database says are installed. When I set this system up, I knew I'd be needing some of the backwards compatible libraries, and installed everything I could find. This one however, the 2.3.3 is NOT installed as of yet, and not sure it's in the compat libs in the first place. Googling came up wiht some odd places to find it, but none were for the centos build, or even rh for that matter. I don't recall the name, but I thought linux libraries were all pretty much the same across the various flavors. I suppose not.
And the rpm-ql..... it gives the location of the compat libs, but again, it's not finding the 2.3.3 version, and until it does, this software will not run.
The compat-glibc packages from Centos4 are glibc 2.3.2 not 2.3.3. If you can successfuly do a rpm -q glibc-compat or rpm -ql glibc-compat then they're installed. Unfortunately it looks like you need glibc 2.3.3 :( You might need to look at compiling glibc-2.3.3 from source or googling for glibc2.3.3 and trying one of the RPMs for it from another distro (definately something to try on a test machine first!).
Tim Edwards wrote:
The compat-glibc packages from Centos4 are glibc 2.3.2 not 2.3.3. If you can successfuly do a rpm -q glibc-compat or rpm -ql glibc-compat then they're installed. Unfortunately it looks like you need glibc 2.3.3 :( You might need to look at compiling glibc-2.3.3 from source or googling for glibc2.3.3 and trying one of the RPMs for it from another distro (definately something to try on a test machine first!).
Tim, I believe you hit the nail on the head that time. I'm not positive, but there actually could be a problem with the portland group's compiler. There have been too many instances of folks building this software on a similar platform with only minor problems. I've run into library problems almost since I installed it. I'm about ready to dump the 64 and drop back to the 32-bit version, if for nothing else, compatiblity' sake with some of this software. I took a look at the pgf library with nm, and there is only one instance where it calls the 2.3 version, and does NOT specify 2.3.3, so there may be something in the sources causing problems too, but again, it's been built on similar systems, but most likely with earlier versions of both the compiler and the OS. I'm at the point now till I have just about run out of options, and after looking at a 2.3.3 version rpm, it won't install because of dependencies and I'm just not going that far with this. I've already spent way too much time tracking down problems, and it still is a dead in the water project. I'll give serious thought to building the sources for that lib, only ifI can verify it *has* to have it..
Thanks for your insights...
Sam Drinkard wrote: I'm at the point now till I have just about run out of options,
and after looking at a 2.3.3 version rpm, it won't install because of dependencies and I'm just not going that far with this.
If its an RPM for another distro you'd almost certainly have to do an rpm --nodeps glibc.xxx.rpm to get it installed as it will probably depend on the packages and versions of packages in that other distro.
Of course this is a very, very hacky solution - use at your own risk and only on a non-production box :)
Tim Edwards wrote:
Sam Drinkard wrote: I'm at the point now till I have just about run out of options,
and after looking at a 2.3.3 version rpm, it won't install because of dependencies and I'm just not going that far with this.
If its an RPM for another distro you'd almost certainly have to do an rpm --nodeps glibc.xxx.rpm to get it installed as it will probably depend on the packages and versions of packages in that other distro.
Of course this is a very, very hacky solution - use at your own risk and only on a non-production box :)
Hi Tim,
Yeah, I looked at that option, and I'm just not ready to get into that kind of mess. There surely has to be another reason for this problem, as others have built the software without so many library problems, however that may be due to them using earlier versions of RH or distros, and earlier compilers. Time for more research I guess...
Sam
-
Hilliard, Jay -
Sam Drinkard -
Tim Edwards