A couple of Debian users reported that running /lib/libc.so.6 didn't work
any more:

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/opt/src/glibc/libc% /lib/libc.so.6 
Inconsistency detected by ld.so: rtld.c: 1175: dl_main: Assertion
`_rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_prev->l_next == _rtld_local._dl_rtld_map.l_next'
failed!

The problem was that the code for adding an explicitly DT_NEEDED'd ld.so.1
assumed that all visible DSOs would be on the searchlist.  If we have a
sysinfo DSO but nothing explicitly DT_NEEDED'd it, then this assertion does
not hold; if you run libc.so.6 (which has the property of a searchlist
containing only two items) then the assert triggers.

I'm using this patch, since I can't think of any other possible pratfalls in
this situation.  Look OK?

-- 
Daniel Jacobowitz
MontaVista Software                         Debian GNU/Linux Developer

2003-09-30  Daniel Jacobowitz  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        * rtld.c (dl_main): Remove assertion when linking dl_rtld_map
        into the list of visible libraries.

Index: rtld.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /big/fsf/rsync/glibc-cvs/libc/elf/rtld.c,v
retrieving revision 1.293
diff -u -p -r1.293 rtld.c
--- rtld.c      24 Sep 2003 01:55:51 -0000      1.293
+++ rtld.c      30 Sep 2003 14:25:50 -0000
@@ -1223,19 +1223,7 @@ of this helper program; chances are you 
       while (GL(dl_loaded)->l_searchlist.r_list[i] != &GL(dl_rtld_map))
        ++i;
       GL(dl_rtld_map).l_prev = GL(dl_loaded)->l_searchlist.r_list[i - 1];
-      if (__builtin_expect (mode, normal) == normal)
-       GL(dl_rtld_map).l_next = (i + 1 < GL(dl_loaded)->l_searchlist.r_nlist
-                                 ? GL(dl_loaded)->l_searchlist.r_list[i + 1]
-                                 : NULL);
-      else
-       /* In trace mode there might be an invisible object (which we
-          could not find) after the previous one in the search list.
-          In this case it doesn't matter much where we put the
-          interpreter object, so we just initialize the list pointer so
-          that the assertion below holds.  */
-       GL(dl_rtld_map).l_next = GL(dl_rtld_map).l_prev->l_next;
-
-      assert (GL(dl_rtld_map).l_prev->l_next == GL(dl_rtld_map).l_next);
+      GL(dl_rtld_map).l_next = GL(dl_rtld_map).l_prev->l_next;
       GL(dl_rtld_map).l_prev->l_next = &GL(dl_rtld_map);
       if (GL(dl_rtld_map).l_next != NULL)
        {


Reply via email to