LinuxQuestions.org
Download your favorite Linux distribution at LQ ISO.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Newbie
User Name
Password
Linux - Newbie This Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question? If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 08-28-2009, 11:09 PM   #1
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Rep: Reputation: 0
Unhappy Unable to install FreeBASIC b/c of unexecutable binary file


First time poster here, feeling a little frustrated by an install process. In short, I have an Ubuntu Intrepid slice from Slicehost on which I'm attempting to install FreeBASIC 0.20.0b. I've followed the install docs and browsed various threads on the FreeBASIC forums but feel like I have a lower-level problem than just not running the install script properly. Here's why...

The install script fails when trying to ascertain the version I'm installing. The lines it fails on are attempting to execute a file called fbc with the -version parameter. The output at that time is:

Code:
./install.sh: 119: ./fbc: not found
I thought... interesting, because when I ls, I see fbc right there. So I figured I'd try ./fbc -version myself and get the following:

Code:
-bash: ./fbc: No such file or directory
I looked for similar threads on the forums here and saw people asking for the results of "file (filename)" and "ls -lb (filename)"...

file fbc:
Code:
fbc: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), for GNU/Linux 2.2.0, dynamically linked (uses shared libs), stripped
ls -lb fbc:
Code:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 myuser myuser 1418304 Aug 10  2008 fbc
fwiw, I know others have installed FreeBASIC on Ubuntu, as I've referenced threads like the following (and tried to use this script only modified to grab the right file version):

http://www.freebasic.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7916

I'm quite the Linux newbie, and even then my experience is really in setting up Apache / PHP / MySQL and DNS. However, from what I understand, I'm observing the rules to execute this file properly. (i.e. case-sensitivity, permissions, trying ./fbc and the full filepath, and attempting to sudo it) There's just some element here that eludes my meager knowledge.

Any advice?
 
Old 08-28-2009, 11:25 PM   #2
i92guboj
Gentoo support team
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,063

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
Is the "fbc" file included in the stock package, or is it generated during the compilation process?

Post the output of "ldd ./fbc", let's see if the linking is consistent.
 
Old 08-29-2009, 10:19 AM   #3
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
"fbc" is part of the .tar.gz you get when you download FB for Linux - it's precompiled. The results I get for "ldd ./fbc" are:

Code:
	not a dynamic executable
 
Old 08-29-2009, 10:51 AM   #4
i92guboj
Gentoo support team
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,063

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by rszrama View Post
"fbc" is part of the .tar.gz you get when you download FB for Linux - it's precompiled. The results I get for "ldd ./fbc" are:

Code:
	not a dynamic executable
This only makes it harder to diagnose. My guess is that this binary is either for a different architecture/OS or it links to a library that's not present in your system.

However, what does this return:

Code:
file fbc
Is it a recognizable file type?

If it's freely available, can you post a link to the exact tarball you downloaded so I can take a look myself?
 
Old 08-29-2009, 11:43 AM   #5
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Thanks for the follow-up. The results of "file fbc" are above in the OP. The tarball is freely available from SourceForge through the link on this page:

http://www.freebasic.net/index.php/d...egory=bin&id=3
 
Old 08-29-2009, 12:13 PM   #6
i92guboj
Gentoo support team
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,063

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by rszrama View Post
Thanks for the follow-up. The results of "file fbc" are above in the OP.
I see, sorry, forgot about that. However this makes the thing "interesting", file says that the file is a standard 32 bits ELF shared executable, but ldd tells us that it isn't. Something is obviously wrong here.

Quote:
The tarball is freely available from SourceForge through the link on this page:

http://www.freebasic.net/index.php/d...egory=bin&id=3
I'll check, thanks.


ps. I've downloaded and extracted that package, the fbc binary is executable and works without problem. I have no idea what your problem might be. If the file didn't exist neither "file" nor "ldd" would be able to parse it. I really can't understand this:

Code:
-bash: ./fbc: No such file or directory
You could check the disk with fsck, sometimes inexplicable things are due to some kind of subtle disk corruption.

Last edited by i92guboj; 08-29-2009 at 12:28 PM.
 
Old 08-30-2009, 10:33 PM   #7
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Hmm... so I attempted a "sudo fsck" and got the following scary message:

Code:
sck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
e2fsck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
/dev/sda1 is mounted.  

WARNING!!!  Running e2fsck on a mounted filesystem may cause
SEVERE filesystem damage.

Do you really want to continue (y/n)?
I said no, because severe filesystem damage sounds awful. :P
 
Old 08-31-2009, 01:54 AM   #8
i92guboj
Gentoo support team
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,063

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
Quote:
Originally Posted by rszrama View Post
Hmm... so I attempted a "sudo fsck" and got the following scary message:

Code:
sck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
e2fsck 1.41.3 (12-Oct-2008)
/dev/sda1 is mounted.  

WARNING!!!  Running e2fsck on a mounted filesystem may cause
SEVERE filesystem damage.

Do you really want to continue (y/n)?
I said no, because severe filesystem damage sounds awful. :P
Yes, it sounds so. You can't run fsck on a volume that's mounted r/w. Boot from a livecd to do the checks.
 
Old 08-31-2009, 01:09 PM   #9
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Bummer. This is actually a VPS I have at Slicehost, so booting from a CD isn't an option. I suppose I could always backup and wipe the server if need be. Is there any way to confirm this is more than just a potential problem before doing so?
 
Old 08-31-2009, 01:14 PM   #10
i92guboj
Gentoo support team
 
Registered: May 2008
Location: Lucena, Córdoba (Spain)
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 4,063

Rep: Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381Reputation: 381
I have absolutely no way to know if that's indeed the problem. It's just one possibility that might very well not be.

If it's a hired vps you should rather contact their techs and see what they can do about it.
 
Old 08-31-2009, 01:53 PM   #11
rszrama
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: Louisville, KY
Distribution: Ubuntu Intrepid
Posts: 6

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 0
Alrighty - I'll get in touch with them and see what happens from there. Thanks for sticking with me so long!
 
Old 05-16-2011, 10:20 PM   #12
audragon
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Distribution: Mint 13 (32-bit)
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
Question A possible Solution ... Maybe

I had the same problem using Ubuntu Natty and FreeBasic 0.21.1.

I extracted the tar file to my /home directory using peazip (linux version-note: peazip is open source) and renamed it the freebasic to save typing in terminal (using the gui). The result was that FreeBasic would not install. Same message install-standalone.sh not found!!!

I then re-extracted the tar file using Ubuntu default unzip program, but did not rename it. And it installed first time in terminal without errors.

This is strange... Or maybe I have been using Windows for too long. I am new to Linux - 10 days now!
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
unable to run c program , error : cannot execute binary file soni_silver17 Linux - Software 4 03-30-2009 09:45 AM
Can't execute binary install file... djbon2112 Linux - Software 5 01-29-2009 08:08 PM
Quick quickie on the subject of unexecutable CGI ronkymac Linux - Software 7 03-16-2005 04:22 PM
Java SDK won't install, binary file not executable, yoper linux 2.6 kernel lopoetve Linux - Software 8 10-30-2004 04:03 AM
JDK binary file install marknyhan Linux - General 2 08-13-2001 01:38 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:26 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration