Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 225371
compat-libstdc++-296 missing libstdc++-libc6.1-1-2.9.0.so or equivalent
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:11:54 EST
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:18.104.22.168) Gecko/20061219 Fedora/22.214.171.124-1.fc6 Firefox/126.96.36.199 pango-text
Description of problem:
Attempt to install some legacy software fails due to missing compatibility libstdc++-libc6.1-1. I am trying to use sgi opengl performer for which we have applications which still use it. This compat library did exist on FC5:
rpm -qpl "/media/FC-5\ i386/Fedora/RPMS/compat-libstdc++-296-2.96-135.i386.rpm"
But, with FC6 all I get is:
rpm -ql compat-libstdc++-296
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
1. Install compat-libstdc++-296
2. Try to install any legacy software requiring the missing libstdc++-libc6.1-1
[root] rpm -Uhv sgi-performer-*
error: Failed dependencies:
libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 is needed by sgi-performer-clipdemos-3.2.2_gcc3-0.i386
libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 is needed by sgi-performer-demos-3.2.2_gcc3-0.i386
Installation of all sgi-performer* rpms
Is there any reason that the compat-libstdc++-296 package does not have the missing libstdc++-libc6.1-1 dynamic library included for FC6 and beyond? I was able to copy the missing library from an FC5 install (I am sure I will not have an FC5 install available as I move on to F7 and beyond) I had available and as a result was able to install (with --nodeps) and run Performer apps. Please update the package to include the missing library.
The removal was intentional, the library has zero chance to build on FC6,
in earlier releases was included as binary blob from RHL6.2 and then binary
patched. We definitely don't want to do that forever.
The libraries are now 8 years old...
*** Bug 225389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I hope that RHEL 5 will include this as sgi performer (although not used as much
as it once was) latest version 3.2.2 was released only Feb 7, 2006 and I am sure
there are other software packages built against the same. I suppose that for
products without paid support there is no desire to provide the necessary
backward compatibility which is understandable in a leading/bleeding edge
product. Hopefully sgi will recognize this and release updated build against
more current libs (doubtful considering their current state).
Thanks for your time and your explanation - much appreciated.
(In reply to comment #2)
> *** Bug 225389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I am Bug 225389 reporter from Tokyo-Japan, and I was surprised that the same
problem reported around the world the same day.
Many companies are using their software environment Over 8 years for many
reasons include my company.
No doubt Only Redhat could keep backward compatibility of legacy Redhat Linux
environment unlike other distribution company,
but people will despair if Redhat throw an old library away at next RHEL5.
I just don't want Redhat to spoil there great advantage.
Thank you for reading my poor opinion.