User avatar
MartinTheWanderer
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:46 pm
Location: Some forest with shit Wifi in South America
Contact: Website Twitter

Different libssl.so/Openssl versions? need libssl.so.1.1 for barrier

Thu Dec 06, 2018 6:38 pm

Hey guys, my old brain remembers having solved a similar problem on a different distro a while back, but somehow I can not remember the solution... :oops:

Problem: I want to use a program that needs a specific version of Openssl and bugs out with "where is muh libssl.so.1.1.", the existing version (1.0.x) obviously is not much liked.

I am trying to get Barrier keyboard/mouse sharing to work on my Solus box.
Solus provides a package for the commercial Synergy, but for obvious reasons I would prefer the free fork (https://github.com/debauchee/barrier)

When I search for available openssl versions with eopkg I do not see any alternatives.

So..... anyone got a brilliant idea how I can either

- convince Barrier to be happy with the lib that Solus provides
or
- install a different OpenSSL version that provides libssl.so.1.1

Thanks for pointing me the right way!
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G with integrated VEGA Graphics on Asus Prime A320M-C R2.0 | Solus 3.999 Gnome / Kali / elementary OS / Tails

User avatar
kyrios
Posts: 2349
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: Different libssl.so/Openssl versions? need libssl.so.1.1 for barrier

Thu Dec 06, 2018 7:49 pm

MartinTheWanderer wrote:
Thu Dec 06, 2018 6:38 pm
Hey guys, my old brain remembers having solved a similar problem on a different distro a while back, but somehow I can not remember the solution... :oops:

Problem: I want to use a program that needs a specific version of Openssl and bugs out with "where is muh libssl.so.1.1.", the existing version (1.0.x) obviously is not much liked.

I am trying to get Barrier keyboard/mouse sharing to work on my Solus box.
Solus provides a package for the commercial Synergy, but for obvious reasons I would prefer the free fork (https://github.com/debauchee/barrier)

When I search for available openssl versions with eopkg I do not see any alternatives.

So..... anyone got a brilliant idea how I can either

- convince Barrier to be happy with the lib that Solus provides
or
- install a different OpenSSL version that provides libssl.so.1.1

Thanks for pointing me the right way!

Why don't you install the flatpak package ?

User avatar
MartinTheWanderer
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:46 pm
Location: Some forest with shit Wifi in South America
Contact: Website Twitter

Re: Different libssl.so/Openssl versions? need libssl.so.1.1 for barrier

Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:55 pm

Thanks for the idea, I assumed as well that flatpack might solve this dependency, but apparently the flatpack version is unhappy as well...

Code: Select all

error: The application com.github.debauchee.barrier/x86_64/stable requires the runtime org.kde.Platform/x86_64/5.10 which was not found
Now which one is easier to fix... :D

...and to clarify: is it possible in general to install different versions of stuff like OpenSSL like in other distros, I could not see an obvious way in eopkg or Software Center. TY!
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G with integrated VEGA Graphics on Asus Prime A320M-C R2.0 | Solus 3.999 Gnome / Kali / elementary OS / Tails

User avatar
kyrios
Posts: 2349
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 4:20 pm

Re: Different libssl.so/Openssl versions? need libssl.so.1.1 for barrier

Fri Dec 07, 2018 9:57 am

MartinTheWanderer wrote:
Thu Dec 06, 2018 9:55 pm
Thanks for the idea, I assumed as well that flatpack might solve this dependency, but apparently the flatpack version is unhappy as well...

Code: Select all

error: The application com.github.debauchee.barrier/x86_64/stable requires the runtime org.kde.Platform/x86_64/5.10 which was not found
Now which one is easier to fix... :D

...and to clarify: is it possible in general to install different versions of stuff like OpenSSL like in other distros, I could not see an obvious way in eopkg or Software Center. TY!

The rule is Solus doesn't install multiple different version of components. As every rules it got exceptions but it is mainly for stuffs like steam that require outdated libraries and it is forbidden to build other packages against these libs.

I have ever seen people telling they create a symbolic link to cheat the application or worst that get the file from a .deb or .rpm package. This is absolutely awful and soon or late it will lead to issues. So my piece of advise is don't even think about doing that it's evil :evil:

Tbf I didn't look at the build instructions, I saw a flatpack package is available and this is supported by Solus, so that's the recommended way to go (why would you build & manually maintain your own package when upstream does it ?)

User avatar
MartinTheWanderer
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:46 pm
Location: Some forest with shit Wifi in South America
Contact: Website Twitter

Re: Different libssl.so/Openssl versions? need libssl.so.1.1 for barrier

Fri Dec 07, 2018 11:04 am

kyrios wrote:
Fri Dec 07, 2018 9:57 am

I have ever seen people telling they create a symbolic link to cheat the application or worst that get the file from a .deb or .rpm package. This is absolutely awful and soon or late it will lead to issues. So my piece of advise is don't even think about doing that it's evil :evil:

Tbf I didn't look at the build instructions, I saw a flatpack package is available and this is supported by Solus, so that's the recommended way to go (why would you build & manually maintain your own package when upstream does it ?)
Hehe, thanks for your patience, Kyrios, and the insights...

Can confirm, have done most of these evil things in the past :mrgreen: , and it ends in a broken system, broken update scenarios, etc., sooner or later.
That's why I asked.

The flatpak still seems to have some issues and is not yet on the "official" flatpack site.

Anybody here by any chance has run into that dependency thing before?
Seems like the flatpak has been built against certain KDE stuff.

Have not touched a KDE based system in years, so I have no clue what the hell needs to be installed to provide "runtime org.kde.Platform/x86_64/5.10"

Searching revealed mainly esoteric problems between different KDE builds, but not a solution on a non-KDE system.
AMD Ryzen 5 2400G with integrated VEGA Graphics on Asus Prime A320M-C R2.0 | Solus 3.999 Gnome / Kali / elementary OS / Tails

Return to “Other Questions”