Thread: BUG #13630: initdb - libreadline.so.6 symbol BC error
The following bug has been logged on the website: Bug reference: 13630 Logged by: Bruce Silveria Email address: bruce@sum-it.com PostgreSQL version: 9.4.4 Operating system: Solaris 10 u10 Description: Version 9.4.1 installs and runs but initdb in versions 9.4.2 thru 9.4.4 returns the following error: initdb --encoding=UTF8 /u/pgsql ld.so.1: initdb: fatal: relocation error: file /usr/local/lib/libreadline.so.6: symbol BC: referenced symbol not found Killed My apologies if I have sent this to the wrong place.
bruce@sum-it.com writes: > The following bug has been logged on the website: > Bug reference: 13630 > Logged by: Bruce Silveria > Email address: bruce@sum-it.com > PostgreSQL version: 9.4.4 > Operating system: Solaris 10 u10 > Description: > Version 9.4.1 installs and runs but initdb in versions 9.4.2 thru 9.4.4 > returns the following error: > initdb --encoding=UTF8 /u/pgsql > ld.so.1: initdb: fatal: relocation error: file > /usr/local/lib/libreadline.so.6: symbol BC: referenced symbol not found > Killed [ scratches head... ] I looked through all the commits between 9.4.1 and 9.4.2 and couldn't find any changes that seemed likely to be related to this. Are you sure you are building 9.4.1 and the later versions in exactly the same way? What configure options are you using, anyway? ("pg_config" output from working 9.4.1 and broken 9.4.2 might be useful to compare.) regards, tom lane
Bruce Silveria <bruce@sum-it.com> writes: > Thanks for the quick response. > Here's a bit more info (just to fill in some of the details): > OS: Solaris 10 i386 u10 "clean install" in a Vmware ESXi enviroment > Installed Python 2.7.10 and its dependencies in /usr/local. Packages from > unixpackages.com > This included readline-6.3 > Downloaded postgresql-9.4.4-S10.i386-32.tar.bz2 > Initially libreadline.so.6 was not found by the initdb command so I set > LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/lib; export LD_LIBRARY_PATH > Then I got the BC symbol error. > I had installed prior versions of postgresql successfully so after a bit of > trail and error (mostly error) I worked back to 9.4.1 which worked. > I also decided to try postgresql-9.5alpha2-S10.i386-32.tar.bz2 which I was > able to install and run successfully. Huh. That's even odder, because if we did break it in 9.4.2, it would surely have been from a patch that also went into the 9.5 branch. The lack of a problem in 9.5alpha2 says that this probably doesn't correlate with anything we did to the Postgres sources. But I'd supposed that you were building Postgres from source, and what this description sounds like is that you were installing executables built by someone else. In that case, the most likely explanation is some shift in their build process. You should ask the packager about it. regards, tom lane