From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Received: by 10.52.61.197 with SMTP id s5mr18296469vdr.8.1398195685853; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:41:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 10.140.19.129 with SMTP id 1mr48292qgh.35.1398195685828; Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:41:25 -0700 (PDT) Path: eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.glorb.com!m5no4177091qaj.1!news-out.google.com!dz10ni19326qab.1!nntp.google.com!cm18no5168993qab.0!postnews.google.com!glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 12:41:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: glegroupsg2000goo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=105.237.162.39; posting-account=FlDDTgoAAAB5iCuW7fM5pP_RHQGC8krX NNTP-Posting-Host: 105.237.162.39 References: User-Agent: G2/1.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Subject: Re: GLIBC_2.14 memcpy From: Ian Douglas Injection-Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 19:41:25 +0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Xref: news.eternal-september.org comp.lang.ada:19500 Date: 2014-04-22T12:41:25-07:00 List-Id: hi All On Tuesday, 22 April 2014 18:54:36 UTC+2, Tero Koskinen wrote: >=20 > 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.. >=20 > 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, b= ut that raised all sorts of workflow issues. Have no experience with virtual machines so have another steep learning cur= ve in front of me. I was reluctant to follow these sort of paths because of the necessity of t= hen 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 x= 86_64 box' but I guess things like linked libraries make that impossible, a= nd 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 kerne= l did which has major downstream knockon effects (and lots of unhappy progr= ammers 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 sorte= d by now. I wonder if upgrading to CentOs 6.4 would solve it? ... the serve= r is a 'cloud' type server which is also a whole new environment for me. Thanks for your help :-) cheers, Ian