Re: libc6_2.0.7r-3 considered harmful
On 1998/07/04, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jul 1998, Ruud de Rooij wrote:
>
> > On 1998/07/03, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> > > On Fri, 3 Jul 1998, Ruud de Rooij wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello,
> > > >
> > > > If people have libnfslock installed, or have created an /etc/ld.so.prel
> oad
> > > > file themselves, upgrading to libc6_2.0.7r-3 (which is currently in ham
> m)
> > > > will leave their system in an unbootable and unusable state because eve
> ry
> > > > executable on the system (except things like sash) will segfault.
> > > >
> > > > I think we should downgrade libc6 on the master archive to -2 to avoid
> thos
> > > e
> > > > situations.
> > >
> > > I suggest we replace it with -4 which is being built as we speak.
> > >
> > > Returning to the older versions breaks other parts of the system in a
> > > fashion, while not as disasterous as your experiece, are, none the less,
> > > important as well.
> > >
> > > The "fixed" version will be tested against both full and empty string
> > > argurments before uploading.
> >
> > Of course, installing a newer, fixed, version in the archive would
> > obviously be the best solution. I just suggested to use the -2 version as
> > an interim solution so that at least people wouldn't be totally screwed.
> >
> Moving /etc/ld.so.preload out of the way is a quicker fix.
Yes, moving /etc/ld.so.preload is a quicker fix for people who have been bitten
by this problem. However, I think we have a responsibility too. I feel very
uneasy knowning that there is a package on the ftp site that will almost
instantly make a system unusable just after it is installed.
The problem arises when people that have an existing /etc/ld.so.preload upgrade
to the latest hamm version. Then suddenly their system breaks and everything
segfaults. Most people won't even know what it is caused by. Some people
don't even have a way to access the net anymore to seek a solution. They need
to reboot with the rescue disk to move that /etc/ld.so.preload out of the way.
Last night, I proposed the suggestion to install the -2 version on the debian
ftp site so that people would not experience that problem. Sure, -2 has its
share of problems too but at least it would not have lead to numerous people
suddenly finding their system unusable after they let apt or dselect upgrade
their system today. As I said most of those people won't even know what it is
caused by.
I think we as Debian should prevent people's systems from crashing rather than
tell them "Oh it is a known problem, just use the rescue disk and ...etc." We
could have prevented a lot of frustration by moving the -3 out of the way
earlier.
> > Dale, thanks for for fixing this problem so quick!
> >
> The praise is appreciated, but I couldn't have done it without the help of
> other great developers. I follow directions well ;-)
>
> Hoping you have better luck with future releases,
I wasn't bitten by this problem myself, but talked to various people on IRC who
were experiencing it.
Greetings,
Ruud.
PS: As of this writing, the libc6 package on master's archive is still the
-3 version.
--
Ruud de Rooij
r.c.m.derooij@twi.tudelft.nl
http://sepc.twi.tudelft.nl/~derooij/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: