Description of problem: Busybox is a special binary, which must be static. However, it requires so from musl library. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): busybox-1:1.35.0-4.fc37.x86_64 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. rpm -Uvh --test busybox-1.35.0-4.fc37.x86_64.rpm Actual results: error: Failed dependencies: ld-musl-x86_64.so.1()(64bit) is needed by busybox-1:1.35.0-4.fc37.x86_64 Expected results: Clean install without dependencies from any library. Additional info:
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora Linux 37 development cycle. Changing version to 37.
This issue breaks using `virtme-run` with -script-sh or -script-exec, as that works by copying the assumingly static /usr/sbin/busybox into a initramfs where it will assume it'll work without external shared objects. It doesn't, however, unless one *also* copies /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 into /lib in the initramfs. Doing that, I'd say is a work around, one should be able to assume /usr/sbin/busybox is a static executable, can one not, assuming no busybox-shared etc is installed. This applies to F36 too. Should I clone this bug for F36? Some other observations: In F35, `ldd /usr/sbin/busybox` gives me "not a dynamic executable" while on F36 I get linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffc89161000) ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 => /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 (0x00007fa94925e000)
From busybox-1.35.0-4.fc36.x86_64: $ rpm -qi busybox | grep Summary Summary : Statically linked binary providing simplified versions of system commands $ rpm -qlv busybox | grep /usr/sbin lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 28 abr 8 2022 /usr/lib/.build-id/31/dce81049eeba32603072cedae67e731390c0e3 -> ../../../../usr/sbin/busybox -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1245312 abr 8 2022 /usr/sbin/busybox lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 9 abr 8 2022 /usr/sbin/busybox.musl.static -> ./busybox $ ldd /usr/sbin/busybox linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffe90ee9000) ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 => /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 (0x00007f4f4f6aa000) Not static at all. :(
As another data point, this broke the upgrade of the RH kernel CI infrastructure from FC35 -> FC37 as the busybox executable was used standalone 😂.
FEDORA-2023-9483e38187 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 37. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-9483e38187
FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e has been submitted as an update to Fedora 36. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e
FEDORA-2023-9483e38187 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-9483e38187` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-9483e38187 See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e has been pushed to the Fedora 36 testing repository. Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command: `sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh --advisory=FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e` You can provide feedback for this update here: https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information on how to test updates.
*** Bug 2160300 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Seems all Ok. Propose to close this bug.
FEDORA-2023-9483e38187 has been pushed to the Fedora 37 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
FEDORA-2023-742d00d24e has been pushed to the Fedora 36 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.