Re: GLIBC_2.14 memcpy

[Ian Douglas <ian@vionia.com>]

hi All

On Tuesday, 22 April 2014 18:54:36 UTC+2, Tero Koskinen  wrote:
> 
> This error message tells that the program is compiled against different
> glibc version. The correct solution is to compile the program using
> same glibc version in both environments (dev box / server).

Yes, I tried that approach but could not update the glibc on the server (no later version available, it seems) and downgrading what's on my dev box is asking for trouble..

> 
> For example, you can setup virtual CentOS 6.2 build machine for
> compilation purposes only and then deploy the binary from there to your
> server.

Ah. Was almost going to get a complete separate box to solve the problem, but that raised all sorts of workflow issues.

Have no experience with virtual machines so have another steep learning curve in front of me.

I was reluctant to follow these sort of paths because of the necessity of then keeping the dev and live environment in sync ... I was hoping for some sort of 'if it compiles on THIS x86_64 then it will certainly run on THAT x86_64 box' but I guess things like linked libraries make that impossible, and sticking the library into the executable will make it huge.

> It is likely that the binary interface of the glibc has changed between
> two versions and the program compiled against one version behaves
> differently if used with another version. Like imagine, if the order
> of some function arguments have changed and your program does Copy (Src,
> Dest) instead of Copy (Dest, Src). (Probably not, but you get the idea.)

Apparently the root cause goes back to something someone on the Linux kernel did which has major downstream knockon effects (and lots of unhappy programmers wasting thousands of hours trying to find out why things would just not work when they did before). I had hoped the issue would have been sorted by now. I wonder if upgrading to CentOs 6.4 would solve it? ... the server is a 'cloud' type server which is also a whole new environment for me.

Thanks for your help :-)

cheers, Ian