Note: This is a beta release of Red Hat Bugzilla 5.0. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Also email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback here.

Bug 78696

Summary: symbol needed by php4 missing in gd
Product: [Retired] Red Hat Linux Reporter: Carlos Morgado <chbm>
Component: phpAssignee: Joe Orton <jorton>
Status: CLOSED DUPLICATE QA Contact: David Lawrence <dkl>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: medium    
Version: 7.2   
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: i386   
OS: Linux   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2002-11-29 17:43:08 UTC Type: ---
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:

Description Carlos Morgado 2002-11-27 18:12:32 UTC
# /etc/init.d/httpd start
Starting httpd: Syntax error on line 225 of /etc/httpd/conf/httpd.conf:
Cannot load /usr/lib/apache/ into server: /usr/lib/apache/
undefined symbol: gdImageStringFT

This is on RH7.2 with all current updates: gd-1.8.3-7 and php-4.1.2-7.2.6.

Comment 1 Joe Orton 2002-11-29 17:25:32 UTC
The latest gd errata for 7.2 is actually gd-1.8.4-4.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 73027 ***

Comment 2 Carlos Morgado 2002-11-29 17:43:01 UTC
could someone push it to then ?

lftp> ls gd*
-rw-rw-r--    4 2220     235       1290977 Jun 04 04:55 gdb-5.2-2.i386.rpm
-rw-rw-r--    1 2220     235        250904 Oct 09 19:05
-rw-rw-r--    1 2220     235        227130 Oct 09 19:05
-rw-rw-r--    1 2220     235         11942 Oct 09 19:05

Comment 3 Joe Orton 2002-11-29 19:30:01 UTC
Oh, sorry, it wasn't an errata, gd-1.8.4-4 was the version shipped in 7.2 - I
guess you've upgraded but didn't pick this package up in the upgrade? 

(This really is a duplicate so can any additional comments go to the other bug?)

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 73027 ***