Date: Sat, 20 Mar 2004 12:48:26 -0500 (EST) From: John Mills <johnmills@speakeasy.net> To: Lowell Gilbert <freebsd-questions-local@be-well.no-ip.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Dependencies of statically linked apps (was Re: update of OpenSSL from tarball) Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0403201236050.14420-100000@otter.localdomain> In-Reply-To: <44smg3mp4t.fsf@be-well.ilk.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20 Mar 2004, Lowell Gilbert wrote: > "J.D. Bronson" <jbronson@wixb.com> writes: > > ..this seems to correctly place all the files where they need to be > > with the exception of a few. I did recompile a few apps since they had > > ldd to older files that were incorrect. .. > Most peoples' mileage *does* vary, because updating OpenSSL by itself > isn't enough. Everything that linked to it statically needs to be > updated as well, which most people won't have the skill (or > inclination) to track down. Good point, but how _does_ one learn which libs have been statically linked when one has only the binary (assuming debug tags were stripped)? If common dependent apps are identified in the bug or fix report, well and good. Otherwise I don't see any alternative to that app's maintainers making the vulnerability information available. If there is a central list or clearing-house of such information, where would it be? - John Mills 1884 Ridgewood Dr, NE Atlanta, GA 30307-1166 404.377.2577 john.m.mills@alum.mit.edu
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.LNX.4.44.0403201236050.14420-100000>