LINUX: OOTP9 Start up problem

[lstephen666]

Hi,

I am getting the following error on attempting to start OOTP9:

./ootp9: /usr/lib/gcc/i686-pc-linux-gnu/4.1.2/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.9' not found (required by ./ootp9)

I use gentoo linux.

Sorry, I'm not entirely sure which versions or tools will provide the most useful output, so I've given none atm.

Thanks,
Levi

[lstephen666]

Some more googling seems to suggest this is a library versioning issue with the standard c++ library included with gcc.

The latest stable gcc for gentoo is gcc 4.1.2, but this symbol was only defined in versions > 4.2, which I guess the ootp binary must have been compiled with.

Does OOTP depend on that version or could the binary to be distributed be built with an older version of gcc?

I could upgrade gcc, but I'm really hesitant to do that for a library that a lot of programs depend on and where more recent versions are not marked as stable for my distro.

Thanks,
Levi

[Tony M]

I've pinged Paul at PISD as he'll be the best person to answer this query.

[pisdpaul]

Originally Posted by Tony M

I've pinged Paul at PISD as he'll be the best person to answer this query.

Thanks Tony..

I have seen this before during testing. As you rightly point out its a dependency issue in stdlibc++ package. Each distro seems to run at different versions which is a nightmare from our point of view. I tried compiling on an earlier system but got errors from some other libs I link against needing a newer version of stdlibc++.

If you dont want to upgrade your system, which is understandable, then you may be able to install the newer verison along side your current version. I am not an expert in this feild so I would need to setup a test bed and play. You may be better off asking the experts on your distros forums as they prob will be able to give you a fix off the top of your head. I am guessing that a "chroot" based setup would fix your issues.

Please report back what you find out

[lstephen666]

I have played around with virtualbox a bit and also looked at chroot based stuff, but to me it seems as if it would be easier for me to install Ubuntu (or maybe even Windows ), on a separate partition and dual boot. Dual booting is an option and what I used to do to play OOTP before my old laptop died.

Is a static build an option? I realize there would be a cost in terms of file size, but no idea how much.

Thanks,
Levi

[pisdpaul]

Originally Posted by lstephen666

Is a static build an option? I realize there would be a cost in
Thanks,
Levi terms of file size, but no idea how much.

I looked into this more than once. However I was unable to source all the required static libs to link too. If I recall there was a problem statically linking stdlibc and libc++ as they require dynamic parts which contain system specific information. This means you can't create a truly static elf file. This can then cause stdlibc/stdlibc++ to fail to initialise and be more dificult to resolve. The GCC man page strongly recomends NOT to statically link these std libs. Which are the ones that you are having issue with.

I think the best option is to install a 2yr old distro for building. That way most (if not all) systems will have a later set of libs that are backward compatible. I just need to resolve a troublesome lib that wont link on older systems.

Confused? I know I am

[lstephen666]

Originally Posted by pisdpaul

I looked into this more than once. However I was unable to source all the required static libs to link too. If I recall there was a problem statically linking stdlibc and libc++ as they require dynamic parts which contain system specific information. This means you can't create a truly static elf file. This can then cause stdlibc/stdlibc++ to fail to initialise and be more dificult to resolve. The GCC man page strongly recomends NOT to statically link these std libs. Which are the ones that you are having issue with.

I was afraid there might be some sort of issue like that

I think the best option is to install a 2yr old distro for building. That way most (if not all) systems will have a later set of libs that are backward compatible. I just need to resolve a troublesome lib that wont link on older systems.

Good to hear that it is being worked on though. Is this timeline for this something like OOTP 10 or is there a goal to have this happening for 9 as well?

Confused? I know I am

Ah yes, the joys of c/linux/linking etc. I'm glad I don't have to work with issues like that every day.

Thanks for looking into this and good to hear it's being worked on, and good that there's a linux build for OOTP now

Levi

[Speck]

Just wondering if you've had a chance to compile it on an older distribution. I downloaded the OOTP9 Linux version and I'm seeing the same error message (running Slackware 12.0 - gcc 4.1.2). Linux is the only OS I use at home, so I'm hesitant to upgrade my system now just for OOTP9 (since I'm planning to upgrade when the next Slackware version is released).

Thanks for producing a Linux version, now if only the SI guys would do the same for FM

[pisdpaul]

Originally Posted by Speck

Thanks for producing a Linux version, now if only the SI guys would do the same for FM

Good luck with that, I have been trying for many years and they don't seem interested. FML was originally developed on Linux (I was one of the two who started the project). The servers are Linux based, yet to my knowledge there is no plans to release the linux client. However FML is based on PISD, FM is not so it would need a fair amount of work to port it.

It is worth pointing out that the uptake on the Linux version of OOTP is rather pitiful. It has not even come close to covering my costs in making it. I can see why developers are not seriously considering Linux. Until enough poeple using Linux want and support commerical software, developers are not gonna spend time and money making them

[Irishray]

Originally Posted by pisdpaul

It is worth pointing out that the uptake on the Linux version of OOTP is rather pitiful. It has not even come close to covering my costs in making it. I can see why developers are not seriously considering Linux. Until enough poeple using Linux want and support commerical software, developers are not gonna spend time and money making them

Very sad news indeed. I have totally switched all my ootp play to the Linux platform. It was a dream come true to me. Hopefully, more interest will materialize so that the Linux version will continue to live and breathe.

Ray

[Speck]

Originally Posted by pisdpaul

It is worth pointing out that the uptake on the Linux version of OOTP is rather pitiful. It has not even come close to covering my costs in making it.

I would expect sales of the Linux version to be pretty slow, at least initially (it was only announced a month ago, correct?). Linux users aren't used to these types of games being produced for the OS, so it will take some time for the news to flow through the user base. I also hope you're able to continue making the Linux version, it really was a great surprise when I saw the news.

[Tony M]

As there hasn't been any update in this thread since last year, it'll be moved to closed for housekeeping purposes. If there are still unresolved problems, let us know and we'll re-open it.