Description of problem: The alternatives setup hardcodes libwbclient.so.0.11, now its libwbclient.so.0.12 Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): samba-4.2.1-2.fc23.x86_64
related issues [that I'm encountering] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215076 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1215106
I think all bugs: BZ1215076 BZ1215106 (and this one) are duplicate of BZ1214973 and fixed by https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/samba-4.2.1-3.fc22
*** Bug 1215076 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
This breaks gnome control center functionality (see linked bug reports), I'm proposing this as a F22 Final Blocker: "All applications that can be launched using the standard graphical mechanism of a release-blocking desktop after a default installation of that desktop must start successfully and withstand a basic functionality test. " https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_22_Final_Release_Criteria#Default_application_functionality
Sorry for confusion, I missed the fact that 4.2.1-4 was supposed to fix this problem and it's already in F22 stable repo. It seems to have fixed the problem for me, and I checked with Jiri Eischmann (who complained in that Bodhi ticket for 4.2.1-4) that it also fixed for him. Unproposing the blocker.
*** Bug 1215378 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Is the use of updates-alternatives really the best idea here? As rdieter wrote on test@: "If the answer is "use alternatives", it often means you're asking the wrong questions. " The justification for it seems vague and short on detail: # Move libwbclient.so* into private directory, it cannot be just libdir/samba # because samba uses rpath with this directory. but I'd *guess* it should be possible to handle this in a less hacky way. Could we have some more details about exactly what the issue is?
Yes, it is on purpose. We have two implementations of libwbclient API in Fedora (Samba and SSSD). They are compatible to certain degree; SSSD version supports less functionality via the same API, namely, password-based logins with NTLM scheme are not supported as they require fully-working winbindd which is not needed in the setups where SSSD-provided libwbclient is in use. The clients are linked against one libwbclient headers and library provided by Samba, SSSD version serves as runtime replacement. [root@ipa-01 localrepo]# rpm -ql --provides -p libwbclient-4.2.1-5.fc22.x86_64.rpm libwbclient = 2:4.2.1-5.fc22 libwbclient(x86-64) = 2:4.2.1-5.fc22 libwbclient.so.0()(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.10)(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.11)(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.12)(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.9)(64bit) libwinbind-client-samba4.so()(64bit) libwinbind-client-samba4.so(SAMBA_4.2.1)(64bit) /usr/lib64/samba/libwinbind-client-samba4.so /usr/lib64/samba/wbclient/libwbclient.so.0 /usr/lib64/samba/wbclient/libwbclient.so.0.12 [root@ipa-01 localrepo]# rpm -ql --provides -p sssd-libwbclient-1.12.90-0.fc22.x86_64.rpm libwbclient.so.0()(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.10)(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.11)(64bit) libwbclient.so.0(WBCLIENT_0.9)(64bit) sssd-libwbclient = 1.12.90-0.fc22 sssd-libwbclient(x86-64) = 1.12.90-0.fc22 /usr/lib64/sssd/modules/libwbclient.so.0 /usr/lib64/sssd/modules/libwbclient.so.0.11.0 We cannot put libwclient.so.0* to %_libdir/ because we have two different implementations of it, up to specific API versions. We use alternatives to switch symlink between compatible implementations.
*** Bug 1215683 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I ran updates Monday evening and the problem is resolved on my system. Gnome Control Center launches and displays now. Thanks
Also fixed here. Yay!
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 23 development cycle. Changing version to '23'. (As we did not run this process for some time, it could affect also pre-Fedora 23 development cycle bugs. We are very sorry. It will help us with cleanup during Fedora 23 End Of Life. Thank you.) More information and reason for this action is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping/Fedora23
*** Bug 1370635 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 1382969 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
try reinstall the library... i fixed the issue with this "workaround" and now the gnome control center starts correctly
This message is a reminder that Fedora 23 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 23. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '23'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 23 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete.
Fedora 23 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2016-12-20. Fedora 23 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
I just ran into this issue using Fedora 26 alpha. Appeared today: 2017-05-26. > gnome-control-center: error while loading shared libraries: libwbclient.so.0
Using: > sudo dnf reinstall libwbclient solves the issue.
This happened to me too on my F26 installations. The suggestion from Tobias worked fine, but I think that a new release of libwbclient-4.6.4 should be made to force the reinstallation of the package. This bug is affecting all Gnome + F26 users.
(In reply to Daniele Viganò from comment #20) > This happened to me too on my F26 installations. The suggestion from Tobias > worked fine, but I think that a new release of libwbclient-4.6.4 should be > made to force the reinstallation of the package. This bug is affecting all > Gnome + F26 users. The problem can happen if rpm scriptlets were not executed due to some reason. e.g. upgrade was aborted in middle. And in such case there would be more problems in rpm database and not just this one. You can check with "dnf check". If it is not this situation then please open a new bug + provide more details. Ideally with deterministic reproducer.
Hello, Hit by same bug in the last days in fresh F26 alpha. solution provided by Tobias in comment #26 corrected the issue. The bug is closed,; would be necessary to open it again as some people complained about that in the last days ?
Please understand, this is not a bug in Samba. This is a bug in rpm/dnf handling of transactions. Just as Lukas pointed out in the comment #21, if whole rpm transaction aborted for some reason, remaining RPM scriptlets, including the one that calls out for configuring alternatives, will not be called and fail. Fedora 26 beta had just exactly this issue with a libdb update which caused a change in RPM environment that wasn't accepted by the rest of transaction because it was already running with an older code. This bug affected all applications (including libwbclient) that were installed as a part of the same transaction as libdb.
Hi Alexander, (I just realized when reading the history I was hit by this bug already 2 years ago) I'm not telling this is a bug in Samba, I was proposing to open it again in the purpose of re-assigning to the right component.
There is already bug #1443415 for that.