From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Oct 25 17:10:54 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E9671065673 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:10:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pisymbol@gmail.com) Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.233]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A1B8FC24 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:10:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pisymbol@gmail.com) Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so1280722rvf.43 for ; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 10:10:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=7LUgUgCHiqDxo3oJpCF7ZMoRovKReVdW6+G4S7Wq2Vk=; b=VImlslBKuakAjiQ9ceEIipUtHR/f+wMb4npSiTZ0fjGiWeIJETiBULmJe0ZEi7/aTF Ezq4OWvZK6liT4loPZQoc8LigWM76czRXD5VPF1yyhUsyvE6IrLQRgijXmWa2A5nYQll firXGThA9ZaZDmuQImVBBqgBG6OLFht+JFasA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=oL+fg1yFhsrcHjEBL2V7BNa/McxOrBXIteB8v+MlvyFv2vZp1alg4o7o8SfqQ4fgbb dCpgpkQsk2ALlQCMOFXesLlNY/4wTZG5DYN6YKIASo9jBCMJX6JVOLwo4NjHvbBdr4Rr xxfiV4z9yONnjDN59ErWdrLdlS32FVepF7fbc= Received: by 10.141.87.13 with SMTP id p13mr2024899rvl.93.1224954654008; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 10:10:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.141.43.14 with HTTP; Sat, 25 Oct 2008 10:10:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3c0b01820810251010n17ba274dsf0a543b8287e8e65@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 13:10:53 -0400 From: "Alexander Sack" To: "Alexander Kabaev" In-Reply-To: <20081025095707.5226d663@kan.dnsalias.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline 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> Cc: Daniel O'Connor , Wojciech Puchar , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Why does adding /usr/lib32 to LD_LIBRARY_PATH break 64-bit binaries? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2008 17:10:54 -0000 On Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 9:57 AM, Alexander Kabaev wrote: > On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 08:49:19 -0400 > "Alexander Sack" 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