Bug 951910

Summary: ldconfig wrong search order
Product: [Fedora] Fedora Reporter: Simone Caronni <negativo17>
Component: glibcAssignee: Carlos O'Donell <codonell>
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa>
Severity: high Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 19CC: codonell, fweimer, jakub, law, pfrankli, schwab, spoyarek
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-04-22 07:03:48 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Simone Caronni 2013-04-14 10:37:21 UTC 
Description of problem:
On a x86_64 system the library folders specified with files in /etc/ld.so.conf.d/ are searched in the wrong order. This happens only with 64 bit shared objects and not 32.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. On Fedora 19, install rpmfusion repository
2. Install nvidia drivers with 32 bit compatibility (yum -y install xorg-x11-drv-nvidia xorg-x11-drv-nvidia-libs.i686)
3. Run ldconfig -p | grep libGL.so.1
  
Actual results:
The 64 bit folder comes after the system one, thus preventing libraries override.
The 32 bit folder comes before the system one, thus working fine and allowing overrides.

# ldconfig -p | grep libGL.so.1
	libGL.so.1 (libc6,x86-64, OS ABI: Linux 2.4.20) => /lib64/libGL.so.1
	libGL.so.1 (libc6,x86-64) => /usr/lib64/nvidia/libGL.so.1
	libGL.so.1 (libc6) => /usr/lib/nvidia/libGL.so.1
	libGL.so.1 (libc6) => /lib/libGL.so.1


Expected results:
Also the 64 bit folder should be searched before the system default one.

Additional info:
Running ldconfig does not solve the problem.
Same setup is working fine in Fedora 18.
Comment 1 Simone Caronni 2013-04-14 10:38:42 UTC 
I forgot to add the version-release of glibc:

# rpm -q glibc
glibc-2.17-4.fc19.x86_64
glibc-2.17-4.fc19.i686
Comment 2 Simone Caronni 2013-04-22 07:03:48 UTC 
Apparently it is a mesa issue, closing this down.

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=952454