On Thu, Oct 09, 2003 at 06:22:33PM +0200, Laurent Bonnaud wrote: > > That ought to tip you off. This is caused by libsafe and has nothing > > to do with glibc. I imagine you would have seen it with an older > > version of glibc too. > > I tested and yes the problem also occurs with older and non > processor-optimized versions of libc6. > > > Try un-preloading libsafe. > > Without libsafe I was indeed able to prelink ooffice. > > Thank you for finding the real problem, and sorry for the bogus bug > report ! > > > Prelinking OpenOffice.org binaries... /usr/sbin/prelink: /lib/i686/libc-2.3.2.so > > has dependency cycle > > Still this message is misleading: I don't see the so called "cycle" > introduced by libsafe. Furthermore, is would be useful to be able to > prelink binaries and still use libsafe. Do you think I should reassign > this bug as a wishlist to libsafe or prelink ?
>From your original message: On Wed, Oct 08, 2003 at 10:17:48AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And indeed there is dependency cycle between those 2 libraries: > > /lib/i686/libc-2.3.2.so <-> /lib/i686/libdl.so.2 > > $ ldd /lib/i686/libc-2.3.2.so > /lib/libsafe.so.2 => /lib/libsafe.so.2 (0x40139000) > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x80000000) > libdl.so.2 => /lib/i686/libdl.so.2 (0x4015d000) > > $ ldd /lib/i686/libdl.so.2 > /lib/libsafe.so.2 => /lib/libsafe.so.2 (0x40005000) > libc.so.6 => /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (0x40029000) > /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x80000000) libsafe presumably uses libdl. If it didn't you'd get a cycle later: libsafe would depend on libc and libc on libsafe. I suppose this would be a wishlist bug for prelink, but I have no idea how it could be solved. -- Daniel Jacobowitz MontaVista Software Debian GNU/Linux Developer -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
