From owner-freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org Wed May 31 01:26:47 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-bugs@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A55BF29DA for ; Wed, 31 May 2017 01:26:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::16:76]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 044F18287E for ; Wed, 31 May 2017 01:26:47 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from bugs.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.118]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id v4V1QknL089447 for ; Wed, 31 May 2017 01:26:46 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 219606] aarch64: libarchive.so.6 not present, libarchive.so not equivalent @ 318898 Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 01:26:47 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: AssignedTo X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: bin X-Bugzilla-Version: CURRENT X-Bugzilla-Keywords: regression X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Many People X-Bugzilla-Who: markmi@dsl-only.net X-Bugzilla-Status: New X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-bugs@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Bug reports List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 01:26:47 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D219606 --- Comment #9 from Mark Millard --- (In reply to Ed Maste from comment #8) > [Ed's description of shared library version handling] Yep, that is expected. I've tried to remember how or when I ran into a generic reference to a: /usr/lib/lib.so or: /lib/lib.so or some such being used to find a library when it was a symbolic link but I've not managed to remember anything. It was not recently --and not even necessarily under FreeBSD since I'm remembering so little. I just end up with a "careful of assumptions" reaction from some past problem that I ran into. All I can say that that I'm pretty sure I've run into the issue where something actually used a generic .so link directly and found and used directly what it pointed to instead of an original binding. (May be it was a fail-over for the original binding not being available to find any more?) This can be translated to: if things still seem to not be working as expected, see if you can check if the link is in direct use from a context where that would not work. A "yes" to that would mean another problem is involved someplace. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=