Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:10:53 -0400 From: "Alexander Sack" <pisymbol@gmail.com> To: "Alexander Kabaev" <kabaev@gmail.com> Cc: Wojciech Puchar <wojtek@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why does adding /usr/lib32 to LD_LIBRARY_PATH break 64-bit binaries? Message-ID: <3c0b01820810251010n17ba274dsf0a543b8287e8e65@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20081025095707.5226d663@kan.dnsalias.net> References: <3c0b01820810231731s1b4d4659j7d1df8bf4abb229c@mail.gmail.com> <20081024104232.X21603@wojtek.tensor.gdynia.pl> <20081024125059.GE1137@server.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <200810250958.15130.doconnor@gsoft.com.au> <3c0b01820810250549r6c1f5614i27709c09d73a2018@mail.gmail.com> <20081025095707.5226d663@kan.dnsalias.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Alexander Kabaev <kabaev@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:49:19 -0400 > "Alexander Sack" <pisymbol@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> Is this a bug or not in FreeBSD's rtld? >> >> -aps > > It is not. In case it was not clear before, I maintain that you _ask_ > rtld for wrong behaviour and you get back what you asked for, down to > the letter. 'Tasting' libraries just because someone somewhere want to > screw up their configuration does not seem right to me at all. I maintain that rtld should not load 32-bit libraries for a 64-bit binary. That is WRONG anyway you look at it. And again, if it checked the arch type and skipped libutil.so.5 in /usr/lib32 it would fall back to checking /lib and things would work. Moreover, if /usr/lib had major number links just like /usr/lib32 has, this would again have worked without issue. I believe this will be fixed on the other side of the fence (not setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH to include /usr/lib32 to begin wtih) but still, my point still stands. -aps
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3c0b01820810251010n17ba274dsf0a543b8287e8e65>