[Bug 1219405] New: older clang package depends on latest libLLVM
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405 Bug ID: 1219405 Summary: older clang package depends on latest libLLVM Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other OS: openSUSE Tumbleweed Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Development Assignee: screening-team-bugs@suse.de Reporter: shung-hsi.yu@suse.com QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Target Milestone: --- Found By: --- Blocker: --- Trying to install older clang will pull in the latest llvm package (libclang13 and libLLVM17):
$ zypper install clang16 # (latest is clang17 at the moment)
The following 11 NEW packages are going to be installed: clang16 libLLVM16 libLLVM17 libclang-cpp16 libclang-cpp17 libclang13 libedit0 libmpdec3 libpython3_11-1_0 python311-base update-alternatives
The problem is likely that c-index-test-16 is incorrectly linked to /lib64/libclang.so.13 that is created from the latest llvm package (llvm17 at the moment), and that ends up making it linked to both the latest llvm shared library (libLLVM.so.17 from llvm17) as well as one in the corresponding package (libLLVM.so.16 from llvm16).
$ ldd /usr/bin/c-index-test-16.0.6 linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffce2336000) libclang.so.13 => /lib64/libclang.so.13 (0x00007fb21ca18000) libclang-cpp.so.16 => /lib64/libclang-cpp.so.16 (0x00007fb218800000) libxml2.so.2 => /lib64/libxml2.so.2 (0x00007fb218690000) libLLVM.so.16 => /lib64/libLLVM.so.16 (0x00007fb211200000) libstdc++.so.6 => /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007fb210e00000) libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007fb210a00000) libclang-cpp.so.17 => /lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17 (0x00007fb20c800000) libLLVM.so.17 => /lib64/libLLVM.so.17 (0x00007fb205200000) libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00007fb21c92f000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fb21cb11000) libz.so.1 => /lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/libz.so.1.3 (0x00007fb218676000) liblzma.so.5 => /lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/liblzma.so.5.4.5 (0x00007fb21863d000) libedit.so.0 => /lib64/libedit.so.0 (0x00007fb218601000) libtinfo.so.6 => /lib64/libtinfo.so.6 (0x00007fb2111c5000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fb2111a0000)
c-index-test-16.0.6 thus will segfault when ran
#0 0x00007fccc253d319 llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&, int) (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3d319) #1 0x00007fccc253aed2 llvm::sys::RunSignalHandlers() (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3aed2) #2 0x00007fccc253db9b (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3db9b) #3 0x00007fccca23f190 __restore_rt (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x3f190) #4 0x00007fccc724587a (/lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17+0x124587a) #5 0x00007fccca2414e1 __cxa_finalize (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x414e1) #6 0x00007fccc719c0f7 (/lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17+0x119c0f7) Segmentation fault (core dumped) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405#c1 Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |aaronpuchert@alice-dsl.net --- Comment #1 from Shung-Hsi Yu <shung-hsi.yu@suse.com> --- I don't use c-index-test per se. This is just something I discovered while trying looking at libclang.so. Seems like we'd need tools that depends on older version of llvm should link with /lib64/libclang.so.$ver from the corresponding llvm$ver-libclang package rather than the libclang package? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405#c2 --- Comment #2 from Aaron Puchert <aaronpuchert@alice-dsl.net> --- (In reply to Shung-Hsi Yu from comment #0)
Trying to install older clang will pull in the latest llvm package (libclang13 and libLLVM17):
While libclang13 from llvm17 is preferred, you should still be able to install llvm16-libclang13 as long as you have no need for libclang13 >= 17.
The problem is likely that c-index-test-16 is incorrectly linked to /lib64/libclang.so.13 that is created from the latest llvm package (llvm17 at the moment) [...]
I'm not sure if that's incorrect. The libclang API/ABI is supposed to be stable, and newer versions should be backwards-compatible, so we shouldn't need to increase the SO version. You should be able to replace libclang13 from llvm16 by libclang13 from llvm17 without issues unless you're making assumptions beyond guarantees provided by the interface. (An example of this would be bug 1210176, where the user made assumptions about the formatting of "identifiers" for unnamed objects.)
$ ldd /usr/bin/c-index-test-16.0.6 linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffce2336000) libclang.so.13 => /lib64/libclang.so.13 (0x00007fb21ca18000) libclang-cpp.so.16 => /lib64/libclang-cpp.so.16 (0x00007fb218800000) libxml2.so.2 => /lib64/libxml2.so.2 (0x00007fb218690000) libLLVM.so.16 => /lib64/libLLVM.so.16 (0x00007fb211200000) libstdc++.so.6 => /lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00007fb210e00000) libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00007fb210a00000) libclang-cpp.so.17 => /lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17 (0x00007fb20c800000) libLLVM.so.17 => /lib64/libLLVM.so.17 (0x00007fb205200000) libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00007fb21c92f000) /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007fb21cb11000) libz.so.1 => /lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/libz.so.1.3 (0x00007fb218676000) liblzma.so.5 => /lib64/glibc-hwcaps/x86-64-v3/liblzma.so.5.4.5 (0x00007fb21863d000) libedit.so.0 => /lib64/libedit.so.0 (0x00007fb218601000) libtinfo.so.6 => /lib64/libtinfo.so.6 (0x00007fb2111c5000) libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00007fb2111a0000)
This used to be an issue in the past, but by now both libLLVM and libclang-cpp use symbol versioning, so the different library versions shouldn't interfere.
c-index-test-16.0.6 thus will segfault when ran
#0 0x00007fccc253d319 llvm::sys::PrintStackTrace(llvm::raw_ostream&, int) (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3d319) #1 0x00007fccc253aed2 llvm::sys::RunSignalHandlers() (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3aed2) #2 0x00007fccc253db9b (/lib64/libLLVM.so.17+0x3b3db9b) #3 0x00007fccca23f190 __restore_rt (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x3f190) #4 0x00007fccc724587a (/lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17+0x124587a) #5 0x00007fccca2414e1 __cxa_finalize (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x414e1) #6 0x00007fccc719c0f7 (/lib64/libclang-cpp.so.17+0x119c0f7) Segmentation fault (core dumped)
It would be interesting to see (more) symbols here. The call to __cxa_finalize indicates that we're in cleanup prior to exiting the process. It might be that c-index-test is assuming that all libraries come from the same build and uses some mechanisms under the hood. (In reply to Shung-Hsi Yu from comment #1)
Seems like we'd need tools that depends on older version of llvm should link with /lib64/libclang.so.$ver from the corresponding llvm$ver-libclang package rather than the libclang package?
Then you couldn't install multiple versions of clang in parallel, unless we're willing to increase the SO version with every release. There has been some discussion about this upstream, but I think not increasing the SO version is actually the right thing, and it would be nice if it had been done so from the beginning. (Some Linux distributions have patched the build to produce libclang.so.1 from the beginning.) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405#c3 --- Comment #3 from Aaron Puchert <aaronpuchert@alice-dsl.net> --- (In reply to Aaron Puchert from comment #2)
This used to be an issue in the past, but by now both libLLVM and libclang-cpp use symbol versioning, so the different library versions shouldn't interfere.
Turns out that this isn't true. I saw symbol versions on libLLVM.so and assumed that libclang-cpp.so must also have them. It doesn't, and I'll add them. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405 https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1219405#c4 --- Comment #4 from OBSbugzilla Bot <bwiedemann+obsbugzillabot@suse.com> --- This is an autogenerated message for OBS integration: This bug (1219405) was mentioned in https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/1224680 Factory / llvm19 https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/1224681 Factory / llvm18 https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/1224682 Factory / llvm17 -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com