Bug 190259 - ldd failure if glibc-2.4.90-3.i386 not installed in addition to glibc-2.4.90-3.x86_64
Summary: ldd failure if glibc-2.4.90-3.i386 not installed in addition to glibc-2.4.90-...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED RAWHIDE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: glibc
Version: rawhide
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Jakub Jelinek
QA Contact: Brian Brock
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2006-04-29 14:01 UTC by John Ellson
Modified: 2007-11-30 22:11 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version: 2.4.90-4
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2006-05-01 11:53:22 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
fix for /usr/bin/ldd (428 bytes, patch)
2006-04-29 14:01 UTC, John Ellson
no flags Details | Diff

Description John Ellson 2006-04-29 14:01:34 UTC
Description of problem:
It is now possible to run a Desktop without any i386 rpms installed (thanks
Caolan), but /usr/bin/ldd fails to run correctly if the i386 version of glibc is
not present.   It fails to produce the correct error message if the file is not
an ELF binary.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
glibc-2.4.90-3.x86_64
glibc-common-2.4.90-3.x86_64

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. touch x; chmod +x x
2. /usr/bin/ldd x
3.
  
Actual results:
/usr/bin/ldd: line 170: /lib/ld-linux.so.2: No such file or directory
ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with unknown exit code (127)

Expected results:
not a dynamic executable


Additional info:

Comment 1 John Ellson 2006-04-29 14:01:34 UTC
Created attachment 128394 [details]
fix for /usr/bin/ldd

Comment 2 Ulrich Drepper 2006-04-30 16:00:39 UTC
That patch is no good as you could have easily seen if you'd looked at the real
sources of the script.  I checked in a patch upstream.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.