On 16/07/21 10:19 pm, Simon Matter wrote:
I think you missed from a different post where the package was created
by a different 3rd-party, not google. So how else would you expect the
3rd-party package to satisfy the dependency?
I didn't say the chrome packages came from google. But, the TO has some
chrome RPM installed which "provides" the libstdc++ version required by
teams, but doesn't really provide this libstdc++ version to the whole
system. That's why the RPM is broken, it claims to provide a libstdc++
version which it doesn't really provide.
And I ask again, how else would you expect the package to satisfy the
dependency in chrome for the newer libstdc++? The package was
explicitly created to allow chrome to run on an older system that
doesn't have the newer libstdc++, by rights it should work with other
programs that need a newer libstdc++ as well provided that they set
LD_LIBRARY_PATH appropriately. So it does, in fact, provide the stated
dependency for the entire system, you just have to tell programs that
need it where to find it.
It may have worked before because older teams required a libstdc++ version
which is available on CentOS 7.
Correct.
The broken chrome packages are the reason why RPM allowed the new teams
version being installed.
Again, they are not broken, they are suitable for the systems they were
built for, which would be current Fedora systems (which happen to have a
newer libstdc++).
But because the chrome package doesn't really
provide to the systems what it claims,
You're confusing here. I assume you mean the package that provides the
libstdc++ dependency which happens to have chrome in it's name but is
not actually chrome and does not come from google or chrome.
teams won't work an is in a broken state.
teams should work if LD_LIBRARY_PATH is set appropriately.
Peter
_______________________________________________
CentOS mailing list
CentOS@xxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos
