Re: Some binaries using /lib/ld.so instead of /lib64/ld.so
Laurent Bonnaud <bonnaud@lis.inpg.fr> writes:
>> Both less versions are compiled with the same libc and ld. Where does
>> your less come from?
>
> Probably from my first attempts at installing Debian/AMD64 in february.
> There were several flavours available and at some point I installed
> packages from several of them.
>
> I reinstalled less and several other packages and now I have the same
> ld.so linkage as you. Thanks !
>
> However, this still does not fixes libc6. I reinstalled the package
> (see below for version info) and I still get the wrong linkage for 7
> binaries included in the package:
>
> $ ldd `dlocate -L libc6 |grep /bin/` |grep ld-linux
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
> /lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00000030f4900000)
>
> Do you get the same thing ?
Yes, both Kurt and I get the same thing for libc6.
> If yes, should I report a bug ?
I believe this is a known issue and cause by glibc being compiled for
/lib. Is it a problem or just some warnings when prelinking? There
should be no need to copy those binaries to another system so strict
compatibility there isn't relay needed.
The problem should resolve itself when glibc changes to multiarch
paths at the latest.
MfG
Goswin
Reply to: