On 15/07/2021 12:57, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Thu, 15 Jul 2021 at 05:30, Toralf Lund <toralf.lund at pgs.com> wrote: >> On 15/07/2021 09:37, Gianluca Cecchi wrote: >>> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 2:03 PM Toralf Lund <toralf.lund at pgs.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Does anyone else run Microsoft Teams on CentOS 7? >>>> >>>> I've used it for a while now, and it's generally worked reasonably well. >>>> However, after upgrading to the latest version from the Microsoft repos, >>>> it doesn't start up properly. Processes start and remain active until I >>>> give up and kill them, but I can't see a window or a tray icon or anything. >>>> >>>> Has anyone else seen this? Is there anything I can do to make the GUI >>>> appear? >>>> >>>> This is not a big deal as everything just works fine if I revert to the >>>> previous release, but it would be interesting to know if this is a >>>> general problem with the software, or I have some weird issue with my >>>> system. >>>> >>>> The release that doesn't work is 1.4.00.13653. The one that does is >>>> 1.4.00.7556. >>>> >>>> - Toralf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> At the end I think you have something broken with your repo config or you >>> installed forcing something. >> Like I said elsewhere, it turns out that it's a little more complicated >> than that. The libraries are actually "provided", but they're not on the >> library path. >> > That isn't provided.. It's quite definitely provided. I'm mean in the rpm/package install context, of course, which is what we were discussing. The libraries/abi versions are also provided in the sense that the actually exist on my system, event though teams can't find them right now. > that is a private copy that chrome bundles > itself to use. It may or may not have all of the library calls in it > (the chrome upstream may only turn on things it knows it wants), and > it may have changes which the team doesn't expect. I think you're missing my point. The teams install works because the package *claims* that it provides everything teams wants (besides what's in the "normal" system libs.) Whether it works or not is a different question. It most likely will, though, if I set up the necessary LD_PRELOAD etc. (haven't been able to try because I needed to have a Teams version i *knew* worked.) It's unlikely that there are "changes which the team doesn't expect"; I'm reasonably sure this is a straight rebuild/repackaging of newer upstream "libstdc++". It's also not an integral part of Chrome, but rather a package someone related to the Fedora team made to allow a certain "upstream" versions of chrome to work on a certain "downstream" OS release. > > Also teams is looking for `rpm -q --whatprovides > 'libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.20)(64bit)'` and you typed > `rpm -q --whatprovides 'libstdc++.so.6(GLIBCXX_3.4.22)(64bit)'` No, it looks for several different "libstdc++.so.6" versions, and the "chrome" package provides them all. I just listed one of them to illustrate the point. > > Basically Microsoft teams will need to bundle this newer version of > glibc they are using to make your software work.