reassign 411542 libc6 retitle 411542 libc6: does not create /etc/ld.so.conf for broken installations severity 411542 serious thanks
On Wed, Feb 21, 2007 at 07:54:53AM +0100, Frank Küster wrote: > Nicolas François <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> couldn't open /etc/ld.so.conf: No such file or directory at > >> /usr/bin/dpkg-shlibdeps line 155. > > > > libc6 is supposed to install /etc/ld.so.conf. > > > > Do you remember when you installed this Etch? > > Do you know the version of the libc6 package at that time? > > My (successful) installation report is in #410710. I used the > businesscard.iso from 2007-02-10 > > In /var/log/aptitude I find > > Aptitude 0.4.4: log report > Mi, Feb 14 2007 13:47:36 +0100 > > IMPORTANT: this log only lists intended actions; actions which fail due to > dpkg problems may not be completed. > > Will install 34 packages, and remove 0 packages. > 217kB of disk space will be used > =============================================================================== > [...] > [UPGRADE] libc6 2.3.6.ds1-10 -> 2.3.6.ds1-11 > > And I don't think I ever used apt-get upgrade. > > > This bug could be caused by the libc6 bug #409516, fixed in libc6 > > 2.3.6.ds1-11 (Feb 3, and migrated to testing only 5 days before your bug > > report). > > > > It could be nice to see if upgrading libc6 fixes this bug. > > No, it didn't create it upon upgrade. The current postinst has: > > # Add support for /etc/ld.so.conf.d > if [ -z "$preversion" ] || dpkg --compare-versions $preversion lt > 2.3.6-16; then > if [ -e /etc/ld.so.conf ]; then > [ -z "$(tail -n 1 /etc/ld.so.conf)" ] || echo >> /etc/ld.so.conf > else > touch /etc/ld.so.conf > fi > if ! grep -q '^include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/.*\.conf$' /etc/ld.so.conf ; > then > echo 'include /etc/ld.so.conf.d/*.conf' >> /etc/ld.so.conf > fi > fi > > That looks too strict, since in my case $preversion is set, but it is > higher than 2.3.6-16. This is indeed to strict. This is actually the version that has introduced the change, so update from sarge or from etch are working. But it does not take into account broken installations. I am reassigning the bug to libc6 as the package must take into account broken installations due to a previous bug in libc6. > However, the "echo >> /etc/ld.so.conf" seems weird to me. What if a > local admin added something there? It looks like a policy violation. Huh??? The policy says that you must preserve local changes. It does not say you must not modified those files. -- .''`. Aurelien Jarno | GPG: 1024D/F1BCDB73 : :' : Debian developer | Electrical Engineer `. `' [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] `- people.debian.org/~aurel32 | www.aurel32.net -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
