Perhaps an SDL faq: XF86VidModeQueryExtension

SDL Development
1

hi there,

when running lsdldoom (doom legacy using sdl), i get the following
message:

./lsdldoom: relocation error: /usr/lib/libSDL-1.2.so.0: undefined
symbol: XF86VidModeQueryExtension

i did a search on google and google groups, and the only thing i was
able to glean was that alot of people with debian (i use woody) have the
same problem.

i also searched the debian/unstable packages, but it looks like woody
and sid have the same package versions.

the sdl faq doesn’t mention this problem, so i assume the problemn is
unique to debian.

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

any advice?

pete–
The mathematics [of physics] has become ever more abstract, rather than more
complicated. The mind of God appears to be abstract but not complicated.
He also appears to like group theory. – Tony Zee’s `Fearful Symmetry’

PGP Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D

2

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

The real fix is to submit a bug report to Debian’s SDL maintainer so that
we need not put this in the FAQ at all. :slight_smile:

Building from source WILL resolve the problem, though.

–ryan.

3

(actually replying more to the original poster, but I delete messages too
quickly)

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

Just out of curiosity, when are you getting this error? I downloaded
http://www.lbjhs.net/~jessh/lsdldoom/src/lsdldoom-1.4.4.4.tar.gz
and compiled it, and it worked fine on both my Sid and Woody boxes (after I
worked out I needed to run it from the data dir so it could load boomlump.wad)

Btw, you might want to check out the prboom Debian package - looks remarkably
similar to lsdldoom, although I only gave it a cursory examination (“yep,
that’s Doom alright”) - seems to have the same extended options in the menu.

And the doom-wad-shareware package will install the Doom 1 wad for you in
/usr/share/games/doom.–
Mike.

4

begin Mike

(actually replying more to the original poster, but I delete messages too
quickly)

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

Just out of curiosity, when are you getting this error? I downloaded
http://www.lbjhs.net/~jessh/lsdldoom/src/lsdldoom-1.4.4.4.tar.gz
and compiled it, and it worked fine on both my Sid and Woody boxes (after I
worked out I needed to run it from the data dir so it could load boomlump.wad)

unfortunately, there seems to be two different “lsdldoom”'s in the
world. at least i think this is the case.

the version i was talking about is from the ‘doom legacy’ port which is
at version 1.32 beta 4. i think this port is the best from a user’s
viewpoint – it has alot of nice features. scroll look (being able to
look up and down) and jumping really make the game /much/ more
enjoyable.

Btw, you might want to check out the prboom Debian package - looks remarkably
similar to lsdldoom, although I only gave it a cursory examination (“yep,
that’s Doom alright”) - seems to have the same extended options in the menu.

yeah, i submitted a few patches for prboom to clear up mindless compiler
warnings like hanging if/else statements. i like the team alot, and i’m
routing for them. but unfortunately, it’s really hard to beat scroll
looking and jumping. it really changes the game for the better by alot.
adn they don’t seem to be ready to implement these features any time
soon.

come to think of it, i think doom legacy is gpl. i don’t remember
seeing the source code anywhere, but i’ll take a look. perhaps
compiling it from source will help. thanks for the idea!

man, someone needs to write an article on all the different ports out
there. :wink:

pete–
The mathematics [of physics] has become ever more abstract, rather than more
complicated. The mind of God appears to be abstract but not complicated.
He also appears to like group theory. – Tony Zee’s `Fearful Symmetry’

PGP Fingerprint: B9F1 6CF3 47C4 7CD8 D33E 70A9 A3B9 1945 67EA 951D

5

unfortunately, there seems to be two different “lsdldoom”'s in the
world. at least i think this is the case.

the version i was talking about is from the ‘doom legacy’ port which is
at version 1.32 beta 4. i think this port is the best from a user’s
viewpoint – it has alot of nice features. scroll look (being able to
look up and down) and jumping really make the game /much/ more
enjoyable.

Okay, let’s try this again :wink: I downloaded
http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/doomlegacy/legacy_132beta4_linux.tar.gz

I ran lsdldoom - worked fine for my machine running Sid, but my server which
runs woody had the problem you described. The other binary (llxdoom) ran
okay though.

I downloaded the source too, but who knows what the heck you’re supposed to
do with that…

I’ve had a look around to see if installing some extra package fixes the
problem but I haven’t had any success, but I don’t really know what I’m
looking for anyway. Sorry :-)On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Peter Jay Salzman wrote:

Mike.

6

Small note, the only real two ports of doom is doom legacy and prboom.
lsdldoom isnt that goodOn 16-Jan-2002, Mike wrote:

(actually replying more to the original poster, but I delete messages too
quickly)

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

Just out of curiosity, when are you getting this error? I downloaded
http://www.lbjhs.net/~jessh/lsdldoom/src/lsdldoom-1.4.4.4.tar.gz
and compiled it, and it worked fine on both my Sid and Woody boxes (after I
worked out I needed to run it from the data dir so it could load boomlump.wad)

Btw, you might want to check out the prboom Debian package - looks remarkably
similar to lsdldoom, although I only gave it a cursory examination (“yep,
that’s Doom alright”) - seems to have the same extended options in the menu.

And the doom-wad-shareware package will install the Doom 1 wad for you in
/usr/share/games/doom.

–
Mike.

SDL mailing list
SDL at libsdl.org
http://www.libsdl.org/mailman/listinfo/sdl

–
Patrick “Diablo-D3” McFarland || unknown at panax.com
"Don’t worry about how ugly you are, worry about how ugly your code is."

7

Debian’s SDL is compiled the way it is right now because of a problem on
certain architectures which will not allow you to link static libraries
into shared ones. i386 is not one of these platforms, so it seems like
the way SDL has worked before is just fine to us. For a binary, just
compiling against Debian’s libSDL should fix the problem - I say should.

Libraries such as libSDL_image need a little more tweaking. The way
Debian does things is more correct AFAIK, and should be adopted upstream
if it has not already.On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 07:20:59PM -0500, Ryan C. Gordon wrote:

is there a fix for this? i was kind of thinking of installing sdl from
source, but i’d rather not have two sets of of the same library on the
machine at the same time. it just sounds like really bad karma.
and uninstalling debian’s sdl package is going raise all kinds of
dependency hells.

The real fix is to submit a bug report to Debian’s SDL maintainer so that
we need not put this in the FAQ at all. :slight_smile:

Building from source WILL resolve the problem, though.

–
Joseph Carter Intelligent backside at large

do {
:
} until (HELL_FREEZES_OVER);

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed…
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 273 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: http://lists.libsdl.org/pipermail/sdl-libsdl.org/attachments/20020115/05173b85/attachment.pgp

8

Libraries such as libSDL_image need a little more tweaking. The way
Debian does things is more correct AFAIK, and should be adopted upstream
if it has not already.

I’ll have to review the patches when I get some time.
If somebody wants to send me a reminder every once in a while, that would
be nice.

See ya,
-Sam Lantinga, Software Engineer, Blizzard Entertainment