Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?

• Previous message: lcoe: "Re: Read UNIX mbox files on Windows?"
• In reply to: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Next in thread: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Reply: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Date: 23 Jun 2003 09:24:33 -0700

David West (km4hr@netscape.net) wrote:
: jholly@cup.hp.com (Jim Hollenback) wrote in message news:<3ef3e08c$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com>...
: > Greg Cagle (gregc@gregcagle.com) wrote:
: > : David West wrote:
: >
: > : > I have an app that runs on 10.20 but doesn't run on 11.00 and can't be
: > : > upgraded. Is there any way at all to run this app on 11.00? Any sort
: > : > of "compatibility mode" etc? Any way to use 10.20 libraries on 11.00
: > : > or otherwise make the app think this is a 10.20 machine?
: >
: > Unless some one mucked with the install you should have 10.20 libraries
: > on the 11.00 machiine. Look for libc.1 in /usr/lib. Compatibility is
: > automagic.
: >
: > : What is the nature of the failure?
: >
: > Some more clues would help. I seem to remember that on 10.20 one could
: > generate code for PA 2.0 architecture and 11.00 will run on a PA 1.1
: > machine. Is it possible you have a PA 2.0 binary from 10.20 your trying
: > to run on a PA 1.1 11.00 machine? this doesn't work.

: This is an area that is a bit over my head but believe I can say with
: confidence that the architecture of the 10.20 and 11.00 machines are
: identical. They are both model B132 HPUX workstations. The program was
: installed on both machines using the vendor's install scripts. The
: install script relinks the binary.

Bingo. You can't relink 10.20 objects on a 11.00 machine. You end up pulling
the 11.00 libraries in and you core. The 10.20 libraries on the machine
are there for already linked 10.20 binaries. It is not possible to build
10.20 applications on a 11.00 box. (well, not impossible, but very painful).
Does this script use libc.a? This is a really big problem.

: I don't recall any problems during
: install. Now that I've said this perhaps I'll install again and pay
: even closer attention. At any rate, a binary is created where there
: wasn't one to begin with. We have also tried copying the binary from
: the 10.20 machine to the 11.00 machine.

Just about all well behaved 10.20 apps should run correctly on a 11.00 box.
The area were you get into trouble is where you have a 10.20 app that is
priviledge and it is mucking about in areas that are not portable. Also
if the app links in libc.a then you basically up the creek because you have
no way of fixing the problem. The app has pulled in api's that are not
compatible with the 11.00 system. Archive libraries are nasty and bad.

: We get the same identical
: result on execution, as I recall. We experimented with pulling libc
: from the 10.20 machine to the 11.00. I think the results were again
: identical.

I hope it was only libc.1 you moved. libc.2 is the libc for 11.00. This is
probably not very productive since the libc.1 is probably very close on
both machines.

: I am an application programmer and usually don't get involved with
: problems at this level but we have a consultant on site who is
: primarily working on other projects. He is far more knowlegable on
: these issues and is help me as time permits. He understands library
: compatibility and such things far better than I. He feels that library
: issues are the problem and has even suggested analyzing the "symbol
: table" of the executable to see if there may be a way to create a
: translation module to intercept the 10.20 library calls and translate
: them to work with the 11.00 libraries.

Again, you have the 10.20 libraries on the 11.00 system so this "translation
module" is not needed. I still think your best approach is to get tusc
and see where this thing crashes, or use gdb to examine the core file.

: We are currently wondering if
: there is a document describing what library calls changed between
: 10.20 and 11.00.

Its called the release notes.

: This is really getting deep so if you have any ideas
: that we might try please help.

The best two suggestions is use tusc and/or gdb.

: As you mentioned there is a /usr/lib/libc.1 on the 11.00 machine.
: Should the app find this library automatically or is there something
: you have to do to specifically instruct the app to use it?

an app linked on a 10.20 machine will look for libc.1. You don't need
to do anything because dld will load libc.1. You can verify this with chatr.

: How would
: the app know which library to use automatically?

it is built in. Use chatr to see what the dependent libraries are.

: I think my consultant
: redirected a symbolic link to try and force the app to use this
: library but I'm not sure exactly what he did. Is this library supposed
: to be exactly the same as the one on 10.20?

He should not be playing with the the libc.sl link. That is a really good
way to break things. Besides, after the app is linked it doesn't use the
link.

: You said compatibility is
: automagic but perhaps our crystal ball is busted.

yes, especially if your crystal ball is archived.

: If you can inject any insight into this issue it would be greatly
: appreciated. I'll have my consultant help me translate your response.

I would take a close look at the install script. If it is making use of
libc.a your basically hosed at this point. You would then need to go back
to source level and build from scratch. Archive libraries are nasty, ugly
and insure you will have nothing but never ending problems. Don't use them.

Good luck.

--
Jim Hollenback
jholly@cup.hp.com
my opinion.

• Previous message: lcoe: "Re: Read UNIX mbox files on Windows?"
• In reply to: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Next in thread: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Reply: David West: "Re: Run 10.20 App on 11.00 ?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]