Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> retitle 629534 Upgrade fails, resulting in unusable system (no dynamic
> linking)
Bug #629534 [libc6] libc6: Dynamic linker assertion failed after upgrade,
nothing startable anymore
Changed Bug title to 'Upgrade fails, resulting in unusable syst
retitle 629534 Upgrade fails, resulting in unusable system (no dynamic linking)
thank you
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 10:49:48 -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> > Just to confirm that Sven is not alone, I was hit by the same bug.
Me too!
> Thanks. To be clear, that means you are also on i386 and also tri
Author: sthibault
Date: 2011-06-07 21:43:53 + (Tue, 07 Jun 2011)
New Revision: 4716
Modified:
glibc-package/trunk/debian/changelog
glibc-package/trunk/debian/testsuite-checking/expected-results-i486-gnu-libc
glibc-package/trunk/debian/testsuite-checking/expected-results-i686-gnu-i386
I believe I hit the same bug on amd64. After upgrading, all commands fail with
"error while loading shared libraries: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6:
unexpected PLT reloc type 0x25".
/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 is pointing to a rather old ld-lsb-x86-64.so.3,
changing it to point to x86_64-linux-gnu
Package: libc0.1-dev
Version: 2.13-4
Severity: wishlist
FreeBSD libc provides getvfsbyname() function, which is used by NFS
userland code. It can't be provided by libbsd because it's
kFreeBSD-specific:
http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/head/lib/libc/gen/getvfsbyname.c
-- System Information:
Debian
> As you wrote that you are still logged into it you should be able to do
> the following:
>
> $ cd /lib
> $ echo ld*
>
>
Here is is:
$ echo ld*
ld-2.2.5.so ld-linux.so.1.8.10 ld-linux.so.2 ld.so ld.so.1.8.10
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Dima wrote:
> > > But it was in an inline function in that header, so if some binary
> > > package was built on a machine with ancient libc6-dev, that could be a
> > > half-explanation. Where do you get your binary packages from?
> >
> > ftp.de.debian.org
> >
> I also get my p
> > But it was in an inline function in that header, so if some binary
> > package was built on a machine with ancient libc6-dev, that could be a
> > half-explanation. Where do you get your binary packages from?
>
> ftp.de.debian.org
>
>
I also get my packages from ftp.de.debian.org
> But the sy
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Sven-Haegar Koch wrote:
>
> > While upgrading from libc6 2.13-4 to 2.13-5 on a i386 system:
> >
> > Preparing to replace libc6 2.13-4 (using
> > .../archives/libc6_2.13-5_i386.deb) ...
> > Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
> > Setting up libc6 (2.13-5)
> Thanks. To be clear, that means you are also on i386 and also trigger
> the "! "bad dynamic tag"" assertion on upgrade from 2.13-4 to 2.13-5?
That's right.
I'm still logged into the box remotely, but I can not start any new
processes.
Regards,
Dima.
Dima wrote:
> Just to confirm that Sven is not alone, I was hit by the same bug.
Thanks. To be clear, that means you are also on i386 and also trigger
the "! "bad dynamic tag"" assertion on upgrade from 2.13-4 to 2.13-5?
I tried reproducing this in a debian-live i386 installation but I
didn't m
Just to confirm that Sven is not alone, I was hit by the same bug.
Hi Sven,
Sven-Haegar Koch wrote:
> While upgrading from libc6 2.13-4 to 2.13-5 on a i386 system:
>
> Preparing to replace libc6 2.13-4 (using .../archives/libc6_2.13-5_i386.deb)
> ...
> Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
> Setting up libc6 (2.13-5) ...
> Installing new version of config file /etc/l
Package: libc6
Version: 2.13-5
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks the whole system
While upgrading from libc6 2.13-4 to 2.13-5 on a i386 system:
Preparing to replace libc6 2.13-4 (using .../archives/libc6_2.13-5_i386.deb) ...
Unpacking replacement libc6 ...
Setting up libc6 (2.13-5) ...
In
On Sun, Jun 05, 2011 at 10:20:06AM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Aurelien,
Hi,
> On 06/04/11 13:06, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >
> > I do think it is reasonable. The idea behind hwcap or osversion is to
> > provide two versions of the same lib
15 matches
Mail list logo
