1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
when trying to bump sci-geosciences/googleearth to a 6 beta version [1], |
4 |
there's a problem with missing /lib/ld-lsb.so.3 file, which the binary |
5 |
somehow requires, and otherwise fails with a rather cryptic error |
6 |
message (saying that the binary itself is missing). |
7 |
Apparently this is mandated by LSB and some distros provide it in |
8 |
packages such as lsb-core (debian/ubuntu), redhat-lsb (fedora) or |
9 |
glibc-lsb (mandriva), possibly along with other files. It's always a |
10 |
symlink to ld-linux.so.2. |
11 |
|
12 |
Gentoo only seems to have one lsb-related package (sys-apps/lsb-release) |
13 |
which is just some query script. |
14 |
|
15 |
So, I think the options are: |
16 |
|
17 |
1) adding the symlink to the googleearth itself |
18 |
2) adding an extra package for the symlinks |
19 |
3) adding the symlink to glibc itself |
20 |
4) working around it somehow |
21 |
|
22 |
I've tried 4) with no luck (executing "ld-linux.so.2 googleearth-bin", |
23 |
trying LD_LIBRARY_PATH overrides, putting ld-lsb.so.3 symlink in the |
24 |
same directory as the binary), nothing worked except creating the |
25 |
symlink under /lib. If there was a way, it would be easiest for me. |
26 |
|
27 |
Doing 1) would be easy but rather incorrect and possibly result in |
28 |
collisions in the future. |
29 |
|
30 |
Doing 3) would be a question for glibc maintainers (didn't try yet), but |
31 |
I guess they won't like it. |
32 |
|
33 |
Doing 2) is a question of what package to put it in and what else to put |
34 |
there. Frankly, I don't want to study all of LSB to see what's the |
35 |
lsb-core/redhat-lsb packages about, just to get googleearth working, if |
36 |
there's no general interest in LSB compliance. The mandriva approach |
37 |
seems easiest for my needs (it's just the ld symlinks and nothing more). |
38 |
But I understand that I shouldn't make such decision myself, so I ask |
39 |
here. Thoughs? |
40 |
|
41 |
Thanks, |
42 |
Vlastimil |
43 |
|
44 |
|
45 |
[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=348911 |