Vrijaldenhoven, Serge wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> during generation of OS group templates for quattor, we found package tidy to give some error.
> 
> Features collected in /tmp/rpmProvides.out.28995
> Building RPM list with their requirements. May take a while (15-30 minutes)...
> WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6
>           Available archs for libc.so.6 : i686
> WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
>           Available archs for libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0) : i686
> WARNING : No valid arch found for tidy (x86_64) dependency libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
>           Available archs for libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1) : i686
> RPM requirements collected in /tmp/rpmRequires.out.28995
> 
> 
> What seems to be the problem is that the tidy package is a 32 bit application, while having x86_64 in it's name: tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
> Although it looks 64bit:
> rpm -q --queryformat "%{NAME}-%{VERSION}-%{RELEASE}.%{ARCH}\n" -p ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
>   warning: ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2
>   tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64
> We think it's 32 bit.
> 
> 
> 1. It requires 32bit libraries
> $rpm -q --requires -p ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
>   warning: ./tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2
>   libc.so.6
>   libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.0)
>   libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1)
>   rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
>   rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> 
> (64bit applications list '(64bit)' behind the dependencies)
> $rpm -q --requires -p zip-2.3-27.x86_64.rpm
>   warning: zip-2.3-27.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID a7048f8d
>   libc.so.6()(64bit)
>   libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.2.5)(64bit)
>   libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3)(64bit)
>   rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
>   rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
> 
> 
> 2. After installing, it looks like a 32bit application
> $rpm -ivh tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm
>   warning: tidy-2005.9.1-1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID 82fd17b2
>   Preparing...                ########################################### [100%]
>      1:tidy                   ########################################### [100%]
> $file /usr/bin/tidy
>   /usr/bin/tidy: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.0.30, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), not stripped
> $ldd /usr/bin/tidy
>         linux-gate.so.1 =>  (0xffffe000)
>         libc.so.6 => /lib/tls/libc.so.6 (0x00325000)
>         /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x0030b000)
> 
> 
> Greetings,
>         Serge

Interesting ... and it looks like it run's, because for some reason, something 
else it pulling in the 32 bit glibc.  Actually, as I try to pull the 32 bit 
glibc out ... it's pulling out a *huge* list of things, but they are all marked 
i386 or i686.
I'll look into it, but it's going to be quite low on my priority list, if 
someone else wants to see about recompiling it to that it really is x86_64. 
See if there was some setting I missed.

Troy
-- 
__________________________________________________
Troy Dawson  [log in to unmask]  (630)840-6468
Fermilab  ComputingDivision/LCSI/CSI DSS Group
__________________________________________________