On Sun, Nov 20, 2005 at 11:01:47PM +0000, Ken Moffat wrote: > > > Ok, so the order in which libraries are loaded, together with a missing > library, can trigger an assertion failure in glibc. "Doctor, it hurts > when I delete this library which has other libraries depending on it."
In the test case the library was removed. In the live scenario there isn't a library deleted that I can see. A library that is needed claims to be dependant on another library which doesn't exist. However, it seems that the dependancy is dubious as the program runs fine without that library. This is also dependant on the environment the program sets up as noted by the fact the setting/unsetting the LD_LIBRARY_PATH affects whether the bug is triggered. Ultimately, it seems the bug is in allowing a library to depend on a non-existant library. If the library didn't exist at compile time, the compile should have failed. That's what I see from my cursory look. But the bottom line is that this is going to hit people building lfs-6.1.1. It's not very safe to assume these people will only use blfs-6.1.1 for their extra-lfs needs. -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
