[X2Go-User] Current Mac x2goclients crash

Jonathan Fosburgh jonathan at fosburgh.org
Thu Apr 4 15:00:14 CEST 2013


On 4/3/13 6:02 PM, Clemens Lang wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am not subscribed to the list, so please Cc me on all repsonses.
>
>> I have attempted to run the 4.0.0.4 and 4.0.1.0 builds of x2goclient
>> on my MacBook Pro (OS version 10.7.3).  Both of them crash immediately
>> on launch.  When attempting to run from the command line I get illegal
>> instruction 4.  Unfortunately, I have not used a Mac long enough to
>> know how to troubleshoot this (though I do have an extensive
>> UNIX/BSD/Linux background) beyond the basics outlined below.
>
> Can you paste the complete command you're running and its output? I have
> not tested my build on a 10.7 system, because I only have a Mountain
> Lion box – packages are built against the 10.7 SDK though, so they
> should in theory run (however, since I'm using libraries from MacPorts
> and those haven't been built for 10.7 there's a chance that this causes
> problems).

dcom8009196:MacOS jefosburgh$ pwd
/Applications/x2goclient.app/Contents/MacOS
dcom8009196:MacOS jefosburgh$ ./x2goclient
Illegal instruction: 4

>
> Illegal instruction sounds like a 32bit vs. 64bit issue, but afaik the
> only 32bit-only CPUs Apple shipped with any recent OS X version were
> some rather old Mac Minis, so that probably doesn't apply in your case.
>

dcom8009196:MacOS jefosburgh$ uname -a
Darwin dcom8009196 11.3.0 Darwin Kernel Version 11.3.0: Thu Jan 12 
18:47:41 PST 2012; root:xnu-1699.24.23~1/RELEASE_X86_64 x86_64

> The easiest and quickest fix for you, if you already have MacPorts
> installed, would be to install the x2goclient port.

I had finally gotten around to getting fink installed, which doesn't 
seem to have an x2goclient package.  I'll look into Macports.

>
>> For the 4.0.1.0 build, I have verified the md5 sum matches.  I have the
>> .dmg files for the 4.0.1.0 and 3.99.2.1 builds mounted.  One thing I
>> notice is that 4.0.x is significantly smaller than 3.99:
>>
>> /dev/disk1s2                         50272      50272          0   100%
>>      /Volumes/x2goclient
>> /dev/disk3s2                        223104     188328      34776    85%
>>      /Volumes/x2goclient 3.99.2.1
>>
>> Are the newer builds expected to be this much smaller?  Unpacked, the
>> entire dmg for 4.0.x is about 70MB smaller than the actual space used by
>> 3.99.x, even with the dmg for 3.99 being somewhat bigger than the amount
>> of space required.
>
> I do not know how the 3.x series DMGs were built, but I assume since
> those were afaik were universal binaries, that at least the binaries had
> double the size. You should not compare the DMG sizes, though, because
> the 4.x series uses compression and the 3.x ones might not.
>
I wasn't sure if the size difference was to be expected, and I wasn't 
aware those were universal binaries, so in that case the size difference 
does make sense.



More information about the x2go-user mailing list