Bug 246382
Summary: | GNUCash (64bit) will not run | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Gantry York <gantry.york> | ||||||
Component: | anaconda | Assignee: | Anaconda Maintenance Team <anaconda-maint-list> | ||||||
Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> | ||||||
Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |||||||
Priority: | low | ||||||||
Version: | 7 | CC: | notting, ploujj, tomek, uckelman | ||||||
Target Milestone: | --- | ||||||||
Target Release: | --- | ||||||||
Hardware: | x86_64 | ||||||||
OS: | Linux | ||||||||
Whiteboard: | |||||||||
Fixed In Version: | 2.2.1-4.fc7 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | ||||||
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
Last Closed: | 2007-11-20 18:07:04 UTC | Type: | --- | ||||||
Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||
Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||
Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||
oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||
Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||
Embargoed: | |||||||||
Attachments: |
|
Description
Gantry York
2007-07-01 14:59:02 UTC
What does 'rpm -q --qf "%{NAME}.%{ARCH}\n" gnucash' say? I have the same problem but only when both gnucash.x86_64 and gnucash.i386 are installed. Removing both and installing gnucash.x86_64 resolves the problem. For me it looks like /usr/bin/gnucash is overwritten by 32 bit version. The problem is easily reproducible by: # yum remove gnucash # rpm -ivh path_to_gnucash.x86_64 # rpm -ivh --force path_to_gnucash.i386 Check then /usr/bin/gnucash and see that library paths refer to /usr/lib and not /usr/lib64. yum and rpm seem to prevent this problem (they seem to install in correct order when providing both packages in one command line and refuse to install i386 over x86_64), so probably anaconda got it wrong somehow during install. Hrm, there's really no reason that should be multilib. Investigating.... Actually, I see why it's multilib. Why are you installing i386 with --force? How did it get installed to begin with? Actually I have 2 machines where it was installed. On one of them it was installed using kickstart with the following repos defined: repo --name=updates --baseurl=file:///tmp/repos/updates/7/x86_64/ repo --name=everything --baseurl=file:///tmp/repos/releases/7/Everything/x86_64/os/ %pre --log=/root/pre.log [[ -d /tmp/mnt ]] || mkdir /tmp/mnt mount -r 172.28.59.1:/srv/nfs/install /tmp/mnt cp /tmp/mnt/linux/Fedora/ks/7/{wks-rpm-list.txt,std-post.sh} /tmp umount /tmp/mnt [[ -d /tmp/repos ]] || mkdir /tmp/repos mount -r 172.28.59.1:/srv/nfs/install/linux/Fedora /tmp/repos I am quite (but not 100%) sure that the other machine was setup the same way (server addresses and paths might be different). and gnucash listed in the file included as below: %packages --ignoremissing %include /tmp/wks-rpm-list.txt where wks-rpm-list.txt contains line with gnucash alone. Forgot about --force in #2 above. It is needed because rpm/yum complains about some conflicting files and refuses to install package. If you remove both versions, and install the i386 and x86_64 RPMs in the same transaction, which /usr/bin/gnucash do you get? The correct one (with references to 64-bit libraries). But I've only tried it once or twice for both rpm and yum. So, the issue is if there is a 'normal' code path (not --force) to install the 32-bit one and actually get /usr/bin/gnucash. I'm not sure off the top of my head how that would happen. Yes. And as I mentioned I am quite sure this happend during kickstart install. I can provide all the files I used if needed. Or maybe bug submitter has any idea what happend in his case? Pushing to anaconda, then. Sorry I haven't responded. For some reason, I'm not receiving email updates. Anyway, I installed GNUCash using pirut after a full-wipe-the-disk-clean install. I did not --force the install. [root@yosemite ~]# rpm -q --qf "%{NAME}.%{ARCH}\n" gnucash gnucash.x86_64 gnucash.i386 Is it really necessary to have both the i386 and x86_64 versions installed? And is my problem solved if I simply install the i386 version, then the x86_64 version in that order? (In reply to comment #13) > Is it really necessary to have both the i386 and x86_64 versions installed? I do't know but for me it looks like it is not needed. > And is my problem solved if I simply install the i386 version, then the x86_64 > version in that order? This will not work. Just try: # yum install gnucash after removing it first, it should be ok. Or just install x86_64 version: # yum install gnucash.x86_64 You don't need both arches ; one or the other should suffice. But there's an underlying issue somewhere, as having them both installed should *not* break things. Can you attach the /root/install.log and /var/log/anaconda.log? Created attachment 159406 [details]
/root/install.log
This shows that gnucash.x86_64 is installed _before_
gnucash.i386 which may be problematic.
Created attachment 159407 [details]
/var/log/anaconda.log
*** Bug 251867 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** gnucash-2.2.1-4.fc7, gnucash-docs-2.2.0-2.fc7 has been pushed to the Fedora 7 testing repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. If you want to test the update, you can install it with su -c 'yum --enablerepo=updates-testing update gnucash gnucash-docs' gnucash-2.2.1-4.fc7, gnucash-docs-2.2.0-2.fc7 has been pushed to the Fedora 7 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report. |