Bug#630608: [bash] Everything Segfaults After lib6 -7 Upgrade
On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 09:28:19PM +0300, David Baron wrote:
> On Tuesday 19 Sivan 5771 20:42:14 you wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 08:15:49PM +0300, David Baron wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 19 Sivan 5771 20:00:29 Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> > > > > Do please check over the pre/post/install scripts involved so this
> > > > > mess does not recur :-)
> > > >
> > > > I don't really know what can be done, the preinst script already abort
> > > > the installation if a non-dpkg owned version of ld.so is found. After
> > > > all why the preinst script should take care about files which have been
> > > > placed there by the user?
> > >
> > > If they need be replaced, it should be handled. The main thing is that a
> > > valid ld ...so needs be around or else. If there are more than one,
> > > probably no harm as long as they point to the correct library. Telling
> > > the user to get rid of the "non-dpkg" file, naming it, is dangerous. As
> > > soon as it is deleted, the system is hosed.
> >
> > That's what I don't understand, which files did you removed exactly? I
> > don't understand how your system could use a non-Debian provided
> > dynamic linker.
>
> There was no other dynamic linker. When the upgrade said remove ld-2.13.so, I
> did so and boom. If I remember, I placed a ld-linux.so symlink and it ate
> that. (This name shown somewhere, I forget.) I ended up with a valid
> ld-2.13.so.
Given the current code, the only way for it to happen was to have
/lib/ld-2.13.so not owned by dpkg. I fail to see how it happened except
if there is a bug in dpkg.
What was the version from which you upgraded when it happened?
--
Aurelien Jarno GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73
aurelien@aurel32.net http://www.aurel32.net
Reply to: