On 2021/04/17 23:15, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
On 4/18/21 8:02 AM, L A Walsh wrote:
Just to be sure I wasn't misremembering, I installed glibc to a non-global location, and set my LD_LIBRARY_PATH to the new location. In the lib-root, I found: etc/ lib64/ sbin/ usr/ var/ under lib64, I find (among others): ├── lib64 │ ├── ld-2.33.so │ ├── ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 -> ld-2.33.so │ ├── ld-lsb-x86-64.so.3 -> ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 │ ├── libc-2.33.so │ ├── libc.so.6 -> libc-2.33.so --- I'm glad I installed this under a non-root location, since it shows the same error as before -- all programs except statically linked ones disabled:
ls ls: relocation error: /tmp/glibc/root/glibc-2.33/lib64/libc.so.6: symbol _dl_fatal_printf version GLIBC_PRIVATE not defined in file ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 with link time reference
I'm not sure what you are trying to prove here.
You said: -------- Original Message -------- From: John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <adrian.glaubitz@suse.com> On 4/12/21 12:20 PM, L A Walsh wrote:
Because glibc changed to 2.33, a large number of packages had to be updated.
Zero != large number.
This wasn't a "must", it was just done for performance reasons. ---- I said the programs needed to be updated along with glibc -- a large number. You claim it was just a performance reason. Yet I'm showing that it generates a fatal error -- which isn't a performance issue. Adrian claims relinking the apps also was unnecessary -- if that is true, then why won't the apps still run without relinking? You claim it is a security nightmare having to replace 1 lib that has multiple versions. It's already a nightmare since all the programs have to be replaced as well.