[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#969047: marked as done (mldonkey-server: This core is running with glibc 2.28 but it was compiled with glibc 2.27.)



Your message dated Sun, 17 Jan 2021 13:06:38 +0100
with message-id <YAQoTrD/YD+UYZx4@dogguy.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#969047: mldonkey-server: This core is running with glibc 2.28 but it was compiled with glibc 2.27.
has caused the Debian Bug report #969047,
regarding mldonkey-server: This core is running with glibc 2.28 but it was compiled with glibc 2.27.
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
969047: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=969047
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: mldonkey-server
Version: 3.1.6-1+b1
Severity: normal

Dear Maintainer,

I run mlnet and I have this:
> $ mlnet
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] Starting MLDonkey 3.1.6 ...
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] Language FR, locale UTF-8, ulimit for open files
1024
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] raised ulimit for open files from 1024 to 1048576
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] MLDonkey is working in /home/sebastien/.mldonkey
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [Gettext] Loading language resource
mlnet_strings.fr_FR.UTF-8
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] loaded language resource file
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [DNS] Resolving [debiacerlinux] ...
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [DNS] Resolving [www.mldonkey.org] ...
>
> Warning!
> This core is running with glibc 2.28 but it was compiled with glibc 2.27.
> This can lead to unexpected behavior. Consider compiling the core yourself
or getting a binary compiled with glibc 2.27.
>
> 2020/08/26 10:52:26 [cO] Logging in /home/sebastien/.mldonkey/mlnet.log
> 2020/08/26 10:52:28 [dMain] Core started

Solution: So I redid the package via pdebuild on a Buster 10.5 and the message
has disappeared.

Sincerely, seb



-- System Information:
Debian Release: 10.5
  APT prefers stable-updates
  APT policy: (500, 'stable-updates'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386

Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-10-amd64 (SMP w/6 CPU cores)
Kernel taint flags: TAINT_PROPRIETARY_MODULE, TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE
Locale: LANG=fr_FR.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_FR.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE= (charmap=UTF-8)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled

Versions of packages mldonkey-server depends on:
ii  adduser                3.118
ii  debconf [debconf-2.0]  1.5.71
ii  libbz2-1.0             1.0.6-9.2~deb10u1
ii  libc6                  2.28-10
ii  libgcc1                1:8.3.0-6
ii  libgd3                 2.2.5-5.2
ii  libjpeg62-turbo        1:1.5.2-2+b1
ii  libpng16-16            1.6.36-6
ii  libstdc++6             8.3.0-6
ii  lsb-base               10.2019051400
ii  mime-support           3.62
ii  ucf                    3.0038+nmu1
ii  zlib1g                 1:1.2.11.dfsg-1

mldonkey-server recommends no packages.

mldonkey-server suggests no packages.

-- debconf information:
* mldonkey-server/launch_at_startup: false

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
notfound mldonkey/3.1.6-1
thanks

Hello,

On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 05:26:38PM +0200, Sebastien CHAVAUX <seb95.scou@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Warning!
> > This core is running with glibc 2.28 but it was compiled with glibc 2.27.
> > This can lead to unexpected behavior. Consider compiling the core yourself
> or getting a binary compiled with glibc 2.27.
> >

Thanks for reporting this issue! Generally speaking, there could be a binary compatibility
issue. There is none in this specific case. This is why I am closing this bug report.

Regards,

-- 
Mehdi Dogguy

--- End Message ---

Reply to: