[Bug]: 7.24.7版本可以在ubuntu 24 及以下使用了么?

[EricHuber7]

操作系统 / v2rayN / Core 版本

7.24.7

预期情况

正常使用

实际情况

之前7.24.x版本再 ubuntu 24.02 更新后 无法使用,看最下面标注 提升系统 Ubuntu 26.04 + 为这个,想了解一下,我们后面有几个版本没有这个标识了.所以后面是 默认 26+ 还是说 没有标识的 可以再ubuntu24 上面使用了? 谢谢

复现方法

之前7.24.x版本再 ubuntu 24.02 更新后 无法使用,看最下面标注 提升系统 Ubuntu 26.04 + 为这个,想了解一下,我们后面有几个版本没有这个标识了.所以后面是 默认 26+ 还是说 没有标识的 可以再ubuntu24 上面使用了? 谢谢

软件日志

之前7.24.x版本再 ubuntu 24.02 更新后 无法使用,看最下面标注 提升系统 Ubuntu 26.04 + 为这个,想了解一下,我们后面有几个版本没有这个标识了.所以后面是 默认 26+ 还是说 没有标识的 可以再ubuntu24 上面使用了? 谢谢

内核日志

之前7.24.x版本再 ubuntu 24.02 更新后 无法使用,看最下面标注 提升系统 Ubuntu 26.04 + 为这个,想了解一下,我们后面有几个版本没有这个标识了.所以后面是 默认 26+ 还是说 没有标识的 可以再ubuntu24 上面使用了? 谢谢

额外信息

No response

我确认已更新至最新版本

• 是

我确认已查询历史issues

• 是

我确认系统版本是受支持的

• 是

[aleksandr-miheichev]

What decides whether a build installs and runs is the dependency floor hard-coded into the packages and the glibc symbol versions the binaries require, not the wording of a release note.

For 7.24.7 the deb declares libc6 (>= 2.39), fontconfig (>= 2.15.0), desktop-file-utils (>= 0.26), xdg-utils (>= 1.1.3), coreutils (>= 9.4), bash (>= 5.2.21), libfreetype6 (>= 2.13), and the rpm declares glibc >= 2.39. Four of those floors — fontconfig, coreutils, bash and xdg-utils — are exactly the versions Ubuntu 24.04 ships, so the floor is calibrated to 24.04 rather than to anything newer. The zip carries no metadata at all, so its only gate is the dynamic loader: across every native library in the artefact the highest requirement is GLIBC_2.38 together with GLIBC_ABI_DT_RELR, both coming from libe_sqlite3.so, and the glibc 2.39 on 24.04 satisfies them.

So, directly: Ubuntu 24.04 can run 7.24.7, both the deb and the zip, and 26.04 is not needed. Ubuntu 22.04 and older cannot — apt refuses the deb on libc6 (>= 2.39), and the zip unpacks but fails during start-up while loading libe_sqlite3.so, reporting that GLIBC_2.38 and GLIBC_ABI_DT_RELR are not found.

About the marking you saw: it appears in exactly two releases, 7.23.3 and 7.23.4, as "提升最低要求，如下" followed by "macOS 13.7 + / RHEL 10 + / Debian 13 + / Fedora 43 + / Ubuntu 26.04 +". It was added hours after #9710 raised the declared floors. It is absent from 7.24.0 onwards because the notes for the new minor version were rewritten from scratch, not because anything was rolled back; #9780 then lowered the xdg-utils, coreutils and bash floors again shortly before 7.24.1, whilst the glibc, fontconfig and freetype ones stayed where #9710 put them. The practical point is that the figure "Ubuntu 26.04 +" has never been enforced by any mechanism — the enforced tier has been 24.04 throughout.

If 7.24.x genuinely refuses to start on your 24.04, the system version is probably not the cause. The application is published with InvariantGlobalization=false, so the runtime dlopens ICU during start-up, yet the deb declares no libicu dependency at all; on a system without ICU it fails immediately, and when launched from the desktop icon it does so without ever showing a window. Please run sudo apt install libicu74, then start v2rayN from a terminal and post the exact error.

If the error you get is version 'GLIBC_2.38' not found or GLIBC_ABI_DT_RELR not found, then the machine is not on 24.04 — that message cannot appear at or above glibc 2.38, so it would place you on 22.04 or a derivative of it. For that case I maintain unofficial rebuilds at https://github.com/aleksandr-miheichev/v2rayN-oldos, which change exactly two things and nothing else: the native SQLite library is built on a GLIBC_2.34 baseline, and the deb/rpm dependency floors match what those distributions actually ship. Same source as upstream, GPL-3.0, no behavioural differences, and every release is installed and started on Ubuntu 22.04, Debian 12 and Rocky 9 before it is published. Bugs in the application itself still belong here, on a current upstream release, rather than in my repository.

One documentation note for the maintainers: the wiki page linked from every release, Release-files-introduction, still lists "Debian 12 + / Ubuntu 22.04 + / Fedora 36 + / Redhat 9 +" under Linux, which has not matched the packages since #9710. Correcting that page would stop this question recurring.