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

Bug#300119: marked as done (libc6: LD_DEBUG=versions can lead to segmentation fault)



Your message dated Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:06:20 +0900
with message-id <818y4h8olv.wl@omega.webmasters.gr.jp>
and subject line Bug#300119: libc6: LD_DEBUG=versions can lead to segmentation fault
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere.  Please contact me immediately.)

Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)

--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 17 Mar 2005 19:29:16 +0000
>From jsd@av8n.com Thu Mar 17 11:29:16 2005
Return-path: <jsd@av8n.com>
Received: from pcp0010145164pcs.midltn01.nj.comcast.net (www.av8n.net) [68.38.132.132] 
	by spohr.debian.org with smtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DC0gF-0001qm-00; Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:29:15 -0800
Received: (qmail 12636 invoked by uid 21163); 17 Mar 2005 19:29:14 -0000
Message-ID: <20050317192914.12635.qmail@www.av8n.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: libc6: LD_DEBUG=versions can lead to segmentation fault
X-Mailer: reportbug 3.8
Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 14:29:14 -0500
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-8.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_PACKAGE 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

Package: libc6
Version: 2.3.2.ds1-20
Severity: normal


1) I compiled /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 aka libpng12.so.0.1.2.8 from
sources and installed it.  Symptoms are the same using the Debian 
source package or the tarball from libpng.org.

2) As a tangential issue:  Many programs (even ones like "vi", for 
which it doesn't make much sense) now issue the warning
  /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0: no version information available (required by ...)
which is pretty weird;  why does "vi" depend on libpng anyway?
I note in passing that the libpng makefile tries to set some
version information with -soname, and I don't understand why
that isn't good enough .... but that is *not* the bug I wish to 
emphasize at the moment.

3) In the attempt to debug the tangential issue, I tried using
LD_DEBUG=versions.  What a disaster.  Any program that
previously issued a warning now segfaults.  For example:
  LD_DEBUG=versions vi
[snip]
  12633:     checking for version `GLIBC_2.0' in file /lib/libgcc_s.so.1 required by file /usr/lib/libqt-mt.so.3
  12633:     checking for version `PNG12_0' in file /usr/lib/libpng12.so.0 required by file /usr/lib/libqt-mt.so.3
  Segmentation fault

Bottom line:  I don't know what (if anything) is wrong with
libpng12 ... but no matter what, it shouldn't cause ld.so
to segfault.  Wild memory references often lead to sneaky
security problems, not to mention the obvious loss of functionality.

And BTW, as a bonus, if somebody can explain what incantations
are required to compile things with "version information" that
works, that would be great.

Thanks!

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
  APT prefers testing
  APT policy: (500, 'testing')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.7
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C (charmap=ANSI_X3.4-1968)

Versions of packages libc6 depends on:
ii  libdb1-compat                 2.1.3-7    The Berkeley database routines [gl

-- no debconf information

---------------------------------------
Received: (at 300119-done) by bugs.debian.org; 21 Mar 2005 07:06:21 +0000
>From gotom@debian.or.jp Sun Mar 20 23:06:21 2005
Return-path: <gotom@debian.or.jp>
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (webmasters.gr.jp) [218.44.239.78] 
	by spohr.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
	id 1DDGzV-0003eb-00; Sun, 20 Mar 2005 23:06:21 -0800
Received: from omega.webmasters.gr.jp (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by webmasters.gr.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 373B7DEB1E; Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:06:20 +0900 (JST)
Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2005 16:06:20 +0900
Message-ID: <818y4h8olv.wl@omega.webmasters.gr.jp>
From: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>
To: John Denker <jsd@av8n.com>, 300119-done@bugs.debian.org
Cc: GOTO Masanori <gotom@debian.or.jp>
Subject: Re: Bug#300119: libc6: LD_DEBUG=versions can lead to segmentation fault
In-Reply-To: <423D74C7.2080804@av8n.com>
References: <20050317192914.12635.qmail@www.av8n.net>
	<81hdj6944q.wl@omega.webmasters.gr.jp>
	<423D74C7.2080804@av8n.com>
User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.9.9 (Unchained Melody) SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya)
 FLIM/1.14.3 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Unebigory=F2mae?=) APEL/10.3 Emacs/21.2
 (i386-debian-linux-gnu) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI)
MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.3 - "Ushinoya")
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Delivered-To: 300119-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02 
	(1.212-2003-09-23-exp) on spohr.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00,HAS_BUG_NUMBER 
	autolearn=no version=2.60-bugs.debian.org_2005_01_02
X-Spam-Level: 

At Sun, 20 Mar 2005 08:04:07 -0500,
John Denker wrote:
> can be found at
>    http://www.av8n.net/bugs/ldd.txt
> (It's 825 lines long, so I was hesitant to include it
> in email ... but I will do that also, upon request.)
> 
> There is a segfault a few lines from the end, slightly
> hidden.

In this bug report, we don't know which vi is used.  Your vi links a
lot of libraries.  I don't know what the problem is, but I guess (1)
you use non-debian vi which is not linked correctly (2) you use
invalid dynamic linker setting: for example, LD_PRELOAD or
/etc/ld.preload and so on.

I think this bug report is not essentially related with the current
glibc, so I close it.  John, if you plan to use versioned symbols, you
possibly want to read Ulrich Drepper's nice document (try to use
google).

Regards,
-- gotom



Reply to: