[gentoo-user] Re: [OT] Small and dirty 32 bit environment just to flash my Bus Pirate

[Nikos Chantziaras]

On 20/07/17 06:11, tuxic@××××××.de wrote:
> On 07/20 04:51, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>> On 19/07/17 19:57, tuxic@××××××.de wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> My Buspirate v36a needs a newer firmware.
>>> Unfortunately the flasher software is only
>>> available in 32bit and I run a 64bit modern
>>> Gentoo.
>>
>> Is this the tool?
>>
>> https://github.com/DangerousPrototypes/Bus_Pirate/blob/master/package/BPv3-firmware/pirate-loader_lnx
>>
>> That is a dynamically linked executable. I just ran it on my 64-bit Gentoo:
>> [...]
>
> Now it this case changes from "weird" to "mysterious":
>
> I downloaded that file. Here it has the checksum (md5)
>
> 97122ea9062bbabcd04b2ffdee7b1bb8  pirate-loader_lnx

Same md5sum here. So we have the same binary.

> "file pirate-loader_lnx"says:
> pirate-loader_lnx: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.8, with debug_info, not stripped

Same here.


> but "ldd" states:
> ldd ./pirate-loader_lnx
> 	not a dynamic executable

That's where I get a different result. Here, I get:

$ ldd pirate-loader_lnx
         linux-gate.so.1 (0xf776a000)
         libc.so.6 => /lib32/libc.so.6 (0xf7570000)
         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xf776b000)

(Btw, I assume you did "chmod +x pirate-loader_lnx" on it.)


> How can "dynamically linked" and "not a dynamic executable" can be
> true simultanously?

That is weird. Can it be that you're not using a multilib configuration? 
What is the output of:

   $ eix -e glibc

Does it list the "multilib" USE flag as enabled? Does /lib32/libc.so.6 
exist?