Baslinux mailing list

[sindi keesan <keesan AT sdf.lonestar.org>]

On Tue, 16 May 2006 3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org wrote:

> sindi keesan wrote:
> > So it pkg'ed x-libs.tgz.
> > xv now works perfectly
>
> I assume that is the xv from Slackware 4.0.

Yes.
> > But xpdf also still complains about libX11.so.6:
>
> I assume that is a glibc2 version of xpdf
> (i.e. your xpdf is not from Slackware 4.0)
Yes

> > libX11.so.6:  undefined symbol:  _xstat.
>
> That's the same error that stops SWflash working
> on the BL3 X libraries.

I thought so.  Did you find a way to make SWflash work with a later 
libX11.so.6, in BL3?

> > Does xpdf need a newer libX11?
>
> The xpdf in Slackware 4.0 does not need newer X libraries.
> However, if you are using a different xpdf, then its
> library dependencies will depend on how it was compiled.
It was compiled for glibc2.2.  I posted the URL for the site.

> > It works in BL2 with SW7.1 X libraries.
>
> Those X libraries are glibc2.  The BL3 X libraries are
> libc5.

Yes, that appears to be the problem.

If I replace only libX11.so.6 with the one from SW7.1 it segfaults  and I 
cannot run X.

If I don't use icewm, since Xvesa is statically compiled, maybe I can get 
away with just replacing libX11so.6 (or having another version of it at 
which I somehow point xpdf), but how do I start xpdf without an rxvt or 
icewm, both of which use the libc5 libraries?

Is it possible to point xpdf at another location of libX11.so.6 and run it 
from the command line on top of Xvesa?

> > If I replace libX11.so.6, should I replace all the X libraries
>
> Yes, definitely.  All the X libraries should be compatible
> with each other.  However, replacing the BL3 X libraries
> will probably kill all the dynamic X binaries that came
> with BL3, including xinit (startx).

That is what I am afraid of happening.

> Please note:  I am not talking about the BL3 x-libs.tgz
> package.  That works smoothly with BL3 and does not kill

Yes, even Opera compiled for glibc 2.2.5 keeps working.  xv from SW4.0 
works.

> anything.  What Sindi is talking about is replacing the
> BL3 X libraries with X libraries from a later Slackware.
> This is not recommended.  BL3 is designed to work with
> packages from Slackware 4.0.  Packages from more up-to-date
> Slackwares are unlikely to work (and may cause malfunctions
> by over-writing crucial BL3 components).

Which means I should probably learn to compile for BL3.40 if I want later 
software.  Or use BL2 on  my desktop and BL3 without xpdf on the laptop.

> > with X libraries from Slackware 7.1 or even 9.0 or would
> > the libc5 X programs that come with BL3.40 no longer work?
>
> The libc5 X programs would no longer work.  Unlike the
> libraries in /lib (where libc5 and glibc2 libraries
> coexist quite happily), the newer X libraries overwrite
> the old (in /usr/X11R6/lib).

I notice they have the same names.  libX11.so.6.1 from SW4.0 and 7.1

> > If newer libX11 etc. fixes xpdf,
xpdf 3.1

> They don't fix xpdf.  xpdf (from Slackware 4.0) works
> fine with the existing libs.  What you are trying to
> do is use a version of xpdf that was compiled for newer
> libs.  Naturally, it needs those new libs to function
> properly.

So if I used SW7.1 xinit and rxvt and libX11 and libExt and all the libs 
in x-libs.tgz would things work properly?

> > maybe you could also post a SW7.1 or 9.0 x-libs.tgz package.
>
> It's not just the X libs, you also need compatible X binaries
> (eg xinit).  In the Slackware x directory you will find the
> xbin.tgz package.  It contains the base libraries and binaries
> for X.  If you want to experiment with X from a more-to-date
> Slackware (at your own risk), then you could try installing
> the xbin.tgz package.

There was at least one other X package such as xlib.tgz needed.

> > I don't want to experiment since at present it is only xpdf
> > that does not work in BL3.40.
>
> Then I suggest you use xpdf from Slackware 4.0.

It does not read recent pdf files (pdf 1.5).
People keep sending me those or posting them.
Neither do the older ghostscripts.

> > You were experimenting with Flash and later X libraries.
>
> Yes, SWflash requires a more up-to-date X library (unlike
> Opera which works fine with the BL3 x-libs package).
We were lucky with Opera.

> > and nothing else got broken with the later X libraries?
>
> Nearly everything got broken -- xinit (startx), xterm,
> icewm, MagicPoint, etc.  The only X binaries that worked
> were Xvesa (statically compiled) and Opera (with SWflash).

Is it worth making an alternate set of libraries and binaries for those of 
us who want to switch from the libc5 to a later X?

I have the delilinux (?) icewm for BL2 and rxvt and xinit from BL2.

> > Perhaps someone could compile xpdf to work with the
> > BL3.40 (SW4.0) X libraries.
>
> Once again I will say for the benefit of people reading
> this:  there is a version of xpdf (from Slackware 4.0)
> that works fine in BL3.  What Sindi wants is the very
> latest version.

The older version does not read newer pdf files.
People do not send me the older version of pdf files to read.

> > Other X programs might also be looking for Courier.
>
> BL3 comes with a minimal set of fonts.  Users who need
> more fonts should install the xfnts.tgz package from
> the /slakware/x1 directory of Slackware 4.0.

I don't want 2MB of fonts, I was hoping to just point xpdf at one font and 
pretend it is all the others.  I don't care what font it displays as long 
at is it legible.  This is all moot if xpdf 3.1 wont' work in BL3.

> > I hope some day you can make a completely uClibc BL so
> > we don't need two libc's
>
> BL3 does not need two libc's.  With just one libc
> (the built-in libc5) you can run all the BL3 add-ons
> plus you can install packages from Slackware 4.0.

But you can't run anything later unless it is compiled statically 
(mplayer) or for libc5 (netpbm, most of it).  I like the setup of BL3 but 
not the limitations. 
> > and can just add glibc2 from SW9.0 if we want to use
> > precompiled programs from Slackware.
>
> That's two libc's (uClibc and glibc2).  Pre-compiled
> binaries for uClibc are nearly non-existent, so most
> users would be forced to add the second libc (glibc2).
> A completely uClibc BL would actually be worse, not
> better.
>
> Cheers,
> Steven

Does anyone want to help me learn to compile xpdf 3.1 (600K source code 
plus bits of Motif, FreeType and something else, none of which I have) for 
libc5?
Sindi