Fossil Forum

I just tried to update my "remote" fossil to 2.28, which I got from the download page ("Linux x64").

On my local machine (Ubuntu 24.04.4 LTS), fossil version reports:

This is fossil version 2.28 [52445a27f1] 2026-03-11 11:31:46 UTC

When I upload it to my (paid-for) shared hosting service, I get "A 500 error has occured." [sic]

Its permissions are set to 755 (just like my local version). The previous version (2.27) runs just fine. From the terminal on my shared hosting, the output of cat /proc/version is:

Linux version 5.14.0-611.16.1.el9_7.x86_64 ([email protected]) (gcc (GCC) 11.5.0 20240719 (Red Hat 11.5.0-11), GNU ld version 2.35.2-67.el9_7.1) #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Mon Dec 22 03:40:39 EST 2025

Am I doing something wrong? or might there be a glitch somewhere in 2.28? Thanks!

I searched for the misspelling "occured" in both 2.27 and 2.28, and it does not occur anywhere in either version, except within comments. So I don't know where your error message is coming from, but it does not seem to be from Fossil 2.27 or 2.28.

What does "When I upload..." mean? What specific command are you running that gives you that error. Please be specific, so that we can try to repro the problem.

Am I doing something wrong?

Just to rule this part out...

A 500 right after an update is frequently caused by missing or incompatible libraries. That particular binary requires:

$ ldd fossil.228
    linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff3e5b6000)
    libresolv.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libresolv.so.2 (0x00007906e3775000)
    libz.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libz.so.1 (0x00007906e3759000)
    libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x00007906e3670000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007906e2800000)
    /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007906e37a7000)

That list is almost identical to the one from the published 2.27 binary, which also requires libpthread and libdl (curious because Linux doesn't require external libraries for those two particular features):

$ ldd fossil.227
    linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffc1c16f000)
    libresolv.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libresolv.so.2 (0x00007e08e1bea000)
    libz.so.1 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libz.so.1 (0x00007e08e1bce000)
    libdl.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x00007e08e1bc9000)
    libpthread.so.0 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0 (0x00007e08e1bc4000)
    libm.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6 (0x00007e08e1adb000)
    libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007e08e1800000)
    /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007e08e1c1c000)

i.e. those look to be compatible.

The 2.28 binary runs fine in both standalone server mode and CGI mode on my Ubuntu 24.04.3 remote, both inside and outside of a chroot jail, alongside a copy of the current trunk, so library incompatibilities can effectively be ruled out.

:-?

The paid shared host service seems to have older glibc, etc..

And I can confirm, 2.28 doesn't run on older Ubuntu 20.04 LTS distrobox container (while 2.27 is ok).

❯ u20 ./2.28/fossil ver
./2.28/fossil: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.38' not found (required by ./2.28/fossil)
./2.28/fossil: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.33' not found (required by ./2.28/fossil)
./2.28/fossil: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.34' not found (required by ./2.28/fossil)
./2.28/fossil: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.38' not found (required by ./2.28/fossil)
./2.28/fossil: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libm.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.35' not found (required by ./2.28/fossil)

❯ u20 ./2.27/fossil ver
This is fossil version 2.27 [99675884a9] 2025-09-30 11:03:45 UTC

Z 9

I reran the build on an older (Ubuntu 18) Dell laptop. Please download the latest build for Linux and let us know if that clears the problem.

It works now.

❯ u20 ./fossil ver
This is fossil version 2.28 [52445a27f1] 2026-03-11 11:31:46 UTC

Z

UPDATE: After a bit of to-and-fro with my hosting support ... they have whitelisted fossil! AND 2.28 is running fine on it now. :)

What a day.... (Again, I greatly appreciate the support in this forum, too.)

Thanks so much, all, for responding to my issue. It looks like it might have helped others, too.

In my case there was a bit of irony involved: trying to run 2.28 on my shared hosting triggered an account suspension. It turns out that the plan I'm on doesn't permit uploading binaries. (This in spite of getting fossil on that account with their support in May 2021!)

And this was me trying to get my "chiselapp" repo on to my paid hosting.... Alas. I guess I'm going to be looking for some (very) cheap VPS, such as Richard mentioned in that other thread.

(On the domestic front, even £5/mo won't pass budgetary scrutiny ... I see there are options for as low as £1/mo though, and I'm open to recommendations! :).)

P.s. (Update) I meant to say: I expect that "A 500 error has occured." typo was likely my host's work.... Z

Who is the shared hosting provider that you are using? I'm just curious...

Who is the shared hosting provider that you are using? I'm just curious...

iFastNet.com, as it happens. For whatever reason, I've been with them since July 2013. The support has always been very good.

Just today, though, we're having a struggle. Having whitelisted fossil, I keep triggering their suspension. Latest support reply:

I've looked into this further and can see fossil was already whitelisted, what commands do you run before fossil is launched I think something else you run before it is triggering the suspension.

There is a bash script that calls fossil itself in the cgi-bin directory. Hopefully they'll sort it soon, though. It's turned into a bit of a time-sink, as sometimes happens. Sigh. (And apologies for slightly hijacking this thread. Was unintended!)

On the domestic front, even £5/mo won't pass budgetary scrutiny

I've never tried this option and have no affiliation nor can I recommend it, but I've been curious about this "cheap" hosting option and whether or not it could be cost effective for hosting Fossil repositories:

https://www.nearlyfreespeech.net/

Does anyone on this forum have any experience with it?

nearlyfreespeech ... Does anyone on this forum have any experience with it?

They host my DNS and domain registration (for literally a few cents per month) but not my web presence (because that had already been well established elsewhere by that point). They are a by-geeks/for-geeks service and i would not hesitate to use them for other services should the need come up. They were unreservedly recommended to me by former Fossil project member Scott Robison shortly before he passed away and i've had literally 0 issues with them in my nearly-4 years with them. Happy customer.

Their docs are genuine pleasure to read, compared to those hosted by by-business-people/for-non-geeks services.

Does anyone on this forum have any experience with it?

not very recent experience, i used them for for a number of years about 10 years ago. it has been great (but assumes a bit of technical knowledge and being comfortable with shell)!

the systems are running freebsd fwiw.