FS#10652 - motion compiled against old ffmpeg

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Kent Gustavsson (nedo) - Friday, 13 June 2008, 13:46 GMT
Last edited by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 18:06 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Packages: Extra
Status Closed
Assigned To Paul Mattal (paul)
Architecture All
Severity Low
Priority Normal
Reported Version 2007.08-2
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 1
Private No

Details

Description:

Error:

bash-3.2$ motion
motion: error while loading shared libraries: libavformat.so.51: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory

while I have libavformat.so.52


Additional info:
worked for me to make a link to the newer version.

Steps to reproduce:
This task depends upon

Closed by  Paul Mattal (paul)
Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 18:06 GMT
Reason for closing:  Fixed
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Saturday, 14 June 2008, 04:12 GMT
The motion packages in testing don't have this problem. Perhaps we could simply move them to extra if there are no pending issues with them.
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Monday, 30 June 2008, 07:09 GMT
I dont think the motion in testing is compiled with ffmpeg, is there a solution to this issue?
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 01:35 GMT
Hmm. Motion in i686/testing shows the following with ldd, suggesting it's not linked against libav:

[pjmattal@antic trunk]$ ldd /usr/bin/motion
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb8041000)
libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 (0xb8017000)
liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 (0xb7ff2000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb7fcc000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7fb4000)
libjpeg.so.62 => /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62 (0xb7f94000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb7e52000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb8042000)

And I don't get that warning when I run it. Have you also installed ffmpeg from testing?
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 02:04 GMT
The problem is with the motion in extra. It needs to be rebuilt against the ffmpeg in extra.
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 03:18 GMT Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 15:17 GMT
Does 3.2.10.1-2 now in i686/extra resolve this?
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:06 GMT
no it does not solve the issue, it gives the same error in the file system I have libavformat.so.52 not 51
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:08 GMT
Strange. My ldd looks like the below. Are you sure you're using 3.2.10.1-2?

[pjmattal@brahms ~]$ pacman -Q motion
motion 3.2.10.1-2
[pjmattal@brahms ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/motion
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb800d000)
libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 (0xb7fde000)
liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 (0xb7fb9000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb7f93000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb7f7b000)
libjpeg.so.62 => /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62 (0xb7f5b000)
libavformat.so.52 => /usr/lib/libavformat.so.52 (0xb7ec7000)
libavcodec.so.51 => /usr/lib/libavcodec.so.51 (0xb79a0000)
libz.so.1 => /lib/libz.so.1 (0xb798e000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb784c000)
libavutil.so.49 => /usr/lib/libavutil.so.49 (0xb7840000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb800e000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0xb783c000)
liba52.so.0 => /usr/lib/liba52.so.0 (0xb782f000)
libfaac.so.0 => /usr/lib/libfaac.so.0 (0xb781f000)
libfaad.so.0 => /usr/lib/libfaad.so.0 (0xb77e0000)
libmp3lame.so.0 => /usr/lib/libmp3lame.so.0 (0xb776f000)
libtheora.so.0 => /usr/lib/libtheora.so.0 (0xb7726000)
libvorbisenc.so.2 => /usr/lib/libvorbisenc.so.2 (0xb762d000)
libvorbis.so.0 => /usr/lib/libvorbis.so.0 (0xb7604000)
libx264.so.57 => /usr/lib/libx264.so.57 (0xb757e000)
libxvidcore.so.4 => /usr/lib/libxvidcore.so.4 (0xb746e000)
libogg.so.0 => /usr/lib/libogg.so.0 (0xb7469000)
libX11.so.6 => /usr/lib/libX11.so.6 (0xb737a000)
libxcb-xlib.so.0 => /usr/lib/libxcb-xlib.so.0 (0xb7377000)
libxcb.so.1 => /usr/lib/libxcb.so.1 (0xb735f000)
libXau.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXau.so.6 (0xb735c000)
libXdmcp.so.6 => /usr/lib/libXdmcp.so.6 (0xb7357000)
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:13 GMT
that was with motion in extra...with testing i.e 3.2.10.1-2
this is what i get
[venky@ARCHROCKS ~]$ ldd /usr/bin/motion
linux-gate.so.1 => (0xb80ba000)
libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/libmjpegutils-1.8.so.0 (0xb808e000)
liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 => /usr/lib/liblavjpeg-1.8.so.0 (0xb8069000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0xb8043000)
libpthread.so.0 => /lib/libpthread.so.0 (0xb802b000)
libjpeg.so.62 => /usr/lib/libjpeg.so.62 (0xb800b000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0xb7ec9000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0xb80bb000)
why dont i see ffmpeg i.e libavformat?
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:17 GMT
I'm guessing we're chasing after a mirroring bug right now. There's no longer a motion in i686/testing.

There's only 3.2.10.1-2 and it went directly to extra and it's built against ffmpeg 20071204-1 from i686/extra.
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:18 GMT
Sorry I didnt update my pacman DB now iam on right version but now I get the following error
[venky@ARCHROCKS ~]$ motion
motion: error while loading shared libraries: libx264.so.57: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:22 GMT
OK, this one's my fault! I didn't restore x264 to the extra version before rebuilding against the ffmpeg from extra. Oy!

I will have a motion 3.2.10.1-3 in extra soon.
Comment by Eric Belanger (Snowman) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:22 GMT
It's a missing dependency. Seems like the new motion in extra now depends on x264.
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:23 GMT
LOL man fast version upgrades..;)
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:29 GMT
The new version adds a dependency on x264. That was the problem, I think.. you may not have had it at all.

Let me know if i686/extra/motion-3.2.10-1-3 helps.
Comment by Paul Mattal (paul) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:30 GMT
Some days, you catch the doctor when he's in. :)
Comment by Greg (dolby) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 17:33 GMT
So this is solved in "motion in extra" ? :)
Comment by Venky (venky80) - Tuesday, 01 July 2008, 18:04 GMT
yes it is solved

Loading...