PATCHOPENSSL needs to be updated for 64 bit AM2R 1.6

[SuperSamus]

Describe the bug
PATCHOPENSSL is an option meant for Linux distributions that don't offer OpenSSL 1.0.0 (because it's old and insecure). 5d8b7d9
When using the new 64 bit AM2R 1.6 beta, however, the executable is patched incorrectly.
EDIT: Forgot to specify that I'm also using NOAPPIMAGE.

Expected behavior
The executable is patched correctly, and can be launched.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

1. Be on Linux
2. Compile the launcher with PATCHOPENSSL
3. Use the new 1.6 beta (which is 64 bit)
4. Patch it with the launcher, and try to launch it

Platform

• OS: Linux NixOS 23.11
• AM2RLauncher Version: commit 5d8b7d9

Log file

When the runner is launched, it logs (to gather the logs, I launched it outside the launcher):

/home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped: /lib64/libcurl.so: no version information available (required by /home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped)
/home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped: /lib64/libcurl.so: no version information available (required by /home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped)
/home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped: /lib64/libcurl.so: no version information available (required by /home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped)
/home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped: symbol lookup error: /home/user/.local/share/AM2RLauncher/Profiles/AM2R 1.6 Beta/.runner-unwrapped: undefined symbol: X509_free, version OPENSSL_1.0.0

[Miepee]

@peeley can you look into this?
You should be able to get the runner and data file from here: https://github.com/AM2R-Community-Developers/ProfessorG64/releases

Maybe we'll need some hash check on whether we have the old runner before running patchelf on it. Not sure.
Could also be that the new runner still uses outdated openssl, I have not had the time yet to look at it.

[Miepee]

Also just to make sure, @SuperSamus can you patch this without the OPENSSL flag to ensure it's actually a problem of what we do with patchelf, rather than your local dependencies? As the 1.6 requires a few different ones.

[SuperSamus]

Without the OPENSSL flag I can't launch the runner because I'm missing libcrypto.so.1.0.0 and libssl.so.1.0.0.
My distribution doesn't offer these libraries, so I had to forcefully download them and LD_LIBRARY_PATH them.
Doing that, the game starts.

All of this using the same dependencies I was using before (but 64 bit instead of 32 bit).

[Miepee]

and just as double confirmation, if you LD_LIBRARY_PATH those libs with the OPENSLL flag, it still gives the same error, right?

[SuperSamus]

Exactly.

[peeley]

@peeley can you look into this?
You should be able to get the runner and data file from here: https://github.com/AM2R-Community-Developers/ProfessorG64/releases

Sure, I'll take a look. There's no README for that repo, so I assumed that all I needed to do was unzip the release .zip file into the data directory of the patcher; I hope I'm doing that correctly.

I'm able to reproduce the issue as well, although I haven't tried the LD_LIBRARY_PATH workaround. Here's an idea, although a pretty ugly and hacky one - support for OpenSSL 1.0.0 is pretty rare these days, but AM2R relies on it fairly heavily. Might we just check a copy of the required .so files into this repo, so they can be reliably copied in instead of relying on distro package repositories? We would need to update the launcher and the README instructions in this repo (for the non-AppImage flow), though.

[SuperSamus]

Alternatively to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, there is:

patchelf --set-rpath '$ORIGIN/lib' .runner-unwrapped

Where inside the profile you put a lib folder with the 64 bit libraries libcrypto.so.1.0.0 and libssl.so.1.0.0.

_{^{Seriously, this is horrible...}}

[Miepee]

Sure, I'll take a look. There's no README for that repo, so I assumed that all I needed to do was unzip the release .zip file into the data directory of the patcher; I hope I'm doing that correctly.

Sorry, I completely forgot to provide installations instructions <-<
Doing it that way is the wrong approach. The correct approach would be to open the am2rlauncher -> mod settings tab -> add new mod -> select the zip. The process is also documented on the (somewhat obscure) FAQ:
https://am2r-community-developers.github.io/DistributionCenter/faq.html#how-do-i-install-mods

[peeley]

The correct approach would be to open the am2rlauncher -> mod settings tab -> add new mod -> select the zip. The process is also documented on the (somewhat obscure) FAQ:
https://am2r-community-developers.github.io/DistributionCenter/faq.html#how-do-i-install-mods

Thanks, I was able to do that and observe the same behavior. The game crashes and complains about a missing symbol for OpenSSL.

Seriously, this is horrible...

Yeah, I hate it too :(. Unfortunately, there seems like no other realistic workaround other than AppImage (which is not an option for distros like NixOS). I've made a branch of the launcher that depends on another branch of the patcher as a rough proof of concept, that does just this. I'm able to start the launcher, add 1.6 beta as a mod, install, and start the game.

Let me know if it also works on your machines, and if it's a viable path forward. Apologies if there's any glaring errors, btw - I'm fairly ill at the moment.

[Lojemiru]

For what it's worth, the wrapper we're using for 1.6 is a few versions behind the theoretical maximum version number to which we could climb. It is possible, though by no means guaranteed, that the theoretical maximum could be using a newer version of openssl. It's on my list to go see if I can find a clean set of game wrappers for that maximum version number, but 1.6 development has stalled for the moment due to higher priority items in my day-to-day.

[peeley]

It is possible, though by no means guaranteed, that the theoretical maximum could be using a newer version of openssl.

That would be super nice. Even a relatively small bump up to OpenSSL 1.1 would make things much easier when it comes to packaging.

[Miepee]

Might we just check a copy of the required .so files into this repo, so they can be reliably copied in instead of relying on distro package repositories?

Unless we can absolutely not find a workaround, I would very much try to avoid this as much as possible.

---

I would try to see if maybe one has to provide different patchelf arguments. I know the previous version of the runner didnt use curl/openssl at all, I'm not sure if this is still the case here. I'll go see if i can reach Ivar, she was the one who initially pushed this forward.

[peeley]

Huh, I was just able to launch the 1.6 beta after tweaking the .runner-unwrapped with patchelf to clear some symbol version info:

$ patchelf .runner-unwrapped --clear-symbol-version X509_free

The X509_free function seems to be the only OpenSSL function that's getting called, so telling the binary to not care about the library version seems to get things working.

I have a branch for the launcher that's working so far. If it checks out for you all as well, I can make a PR.