Processed: Re: Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
Processing control commands: > tags -1 + confirmed Bug #1021973 [libc-bin] iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade Added tag(s) confirmed. -- 1021973: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1021973 Debian Bug Tracking System Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
Control: tags -1 + confirmed On Tue, Oct 18, 2022 at 09:13:05AM +0200, Guillaume Lefranc wrote: > after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the > following error appeared after running iconv the following way: > > iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1 > > iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version > GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference I'm sorry for having missed this. The fix for this issue is quite obvious. libc-bin needs a tighter version constraint on libc6. Also libc6 needs to break old libc-bin. I don't think this is worth an update on its own though, because partial upgrades are an unusual thing to do. Indeed apt in unstable will make this even more difficult to perform. If there happens to be a regression update for other reasons, this should be fixed as well. Helmut
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
I think it was when a libc6 update broke NSS sometime in 2017, though I can
find only a reference to it in the Ubuntu bug tracker.
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/glibc/2.23-0ubuntu6
We could certainly unblacklist libc6 or blacklist both. I personally think
libc-bin should depend on an equivalent libc6 version but if you don't want
to make the change it's understandable as well
Regards
Guillaume
On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 12:11, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
wrote:
> On 18/10/2022 11:59, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
> > Yes.
> > The upgrade was automatically done by unattended-upgrades, but we have
> > libc6 blacklisted due to issues we encountered previously
>
> What kind of issues? Are they still relevant? Is there a bug report we
> could
> look at?
>
> In this case, I suggest you also block/pin libc-bin to the same version as
> libc6.
>
> Helmut, libc-bin could have a depends on libcX (>= ${binary:Version}),
> although
> this is such a corner case that I don't think an update is necessary just
> for this.
>
> Cheers,
> Emilio
>
> >
> > Unattended-Upgrade::Origins-Pattern {
> >
> "origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";
> > };
> >
> > Unattended-Upgrade::Package-Blacklist {
> >"libc6";
> > };
> >
> > On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 09:23, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
> > wrote:
> >
> >> On 18/10/2022 09:13, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
> >>> Package: libc-bin
> >>> Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2
> >>> Severity: normal
> >>>
> >>> Dear Maintainer,
> >>>
> >>> after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the
> >> following error appeared after running iconv the following way:
> >>>
> >>> iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1
> >>>
> >>> iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version
> >> GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference
> >>
> >> Any particular reason you upgraded libc-bin but not libc6?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Emilio
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
On 18/10/2022 11:59, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
Yes.
The upgrade was automatically done by unattended-upgrades, but we have
libc6 blacklisted due to issues we encountered previously
What kind of issues? Are they still relevant? Is there a bug report we could
look at?
In this case, I suggest you also block/pin libc-bin to the same version as
libc6.
Helmut, libc-bin could have a depends on libcX (>= ${binary:Version}), although
this is such a corner case that I don't think an update is necessary just for this.
Cheers,
Emilio
Unattended-Upgrade::Origins-Pattern {
"origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";
};
Unattended-Upgrade::Package-Blacklist {
"libc6";
};
On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 09:23, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
wrote:
On 18/10/2022 09:13, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
Package: libc-bin
Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2
Severity: normal
Dear Maintainer,
after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the
following error appeared after running iconv the following way:
iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1
iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version
GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference
Any particular reason you upgraded libc-bin but not libc6?
Cheers,
Emilio
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
Yes.
The upgrade was automatically done by unattended-upgrades, but we have
libc6 blacklisted due to issues we encountered previously
Unattended-Upgrade::Origins-Pattern {
"origin=Debian,codename=${distro_codename},label=Debian-Security";
};
Unattended-Upgrade::Package-Blacklist {
"libc6";
};
On Tue, 18 Oct 2022 at 09:23, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort
wrote:
> On 18/10/2022 09:13, Guillaume Lefranc wrote:
> > Package: libc-bin
> > Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2
> > Severity: normal
> >
> > Dear Maintainer,
> >
> > after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the
> following error appeared after running iconv the following way:
> >
> > iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1
> >
> > iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version
> GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference
>
> Any particular reason you upgraded libc-bin but not libc6?
>
> Cheers,
> Emilio
>
--
*Guillaume Lefranc* | Director of Engineering - Technical Operations
g...@productsup.com | +33 6 82 42 58 93 <+4930609858366>
www.productsup.com
*Products Up GmbH*
A globally operative company - *office locations*
HQ: Alex-Wedding-Str. 5, 10178 Berlin, Germany
HRB 214376 B Berlin Charlottenburg; VAT ID DE270578435; Tax No. 30/479/35480
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
On 18/10/2022 09:13, Guillaume Lefranc wrote: Package: libc-bin Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the following error appeared after running iconv the following way: iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1 iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference Any particular reason you upgraded libc-bin but not libc6? Cheers, Emilio
Bug#1021973: iconv: undefined symbol after upgrade
Package: libc-bin Version: 2.28-10+deb10u2 Severity: normal Dear Maintainer, after upgrading libc-bin from 2.28-10+deb10u1 to 2.28-10+deb10u2, the following error appeared after running iconv the following way: iconv -cs -f 'UTF-8' -t 'UTF-8' /tmp/510754/import/import.1 iconv: relocation error: iconv: symbol __gconv_create_spec version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference -- System Information: Debian Release: 10.2 APT prefers oldstable-updates APT policy: (500, 'oldstable-updates'), (500, 'oldstable') Architecture: amd64 (x86_64) Kernel: Linux 4.19.0-6-amd64 (SMP w/12 CPU cores) Kernel taint flags: TAINT_OOT_MODULE, TAINT_UNSIGNED_MODULE Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE=en_US:en (charmap=UTF-8) Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system) LSM: AppArmor: enabled Versions of packages libc-bin depends on: ii libc6 2.28-10 Versions of packages libc-bin recommends: ii manpages 4.16-2 libc-bin suggests no packages. -- no debconf information
