[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Mass bug filing for shared library broken symlinks detected by piuparts

On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 10:41:10AM +0200, Andreas Beckmann wrote:
> On 2013-06-30 22:46, Dave Steele wrote:
> > On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 1:08 PM, Julien Cristau <jcristau@debian.org> wrote:
> >> AFAIK most of these get fixed up by ldconfig, which means they're not a
> >> problem in practice.
> > 
> > It wasn't clear to me how this would be the case, so I reran the logs
> > with a piuparts mod making an ldconfig call before the symlink test.
> > It did not affect the results.
> Proper package installation would include a ldconfig call that should
> have fixed the broken link *before* piuparts checks for dangling links.
> (IIRC there is currently only one package "needing" this ldconfig call
> to actually create a link: libjson0/libjson-c2, #710676). So either a
> call to ldconfig is missing (bug!) or it's not ldconfig's job to fix up
> a dangling e.g.
>   libfoo.so -> libfoo.so.2
> symlink (because it's a missing dependency).
> On 2013-07-01 03:29, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> > I believe that he's referring to ld.so.cache containing a mapping of
> $SONAME ->
> > $lib_realpath, so the broken symlink might not actually result in an
> > unresolvable library.
> But most of these broken links don't look like broken SONAME links (as
> they would have been fixed up by ldconfig).

Oh cool, I didn't realize ldconfig corrected the symlinks.

Kind regards,
Loong Jin

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: