Description of problem: dateshift tries to ld_preload libdsintercept.so, but the library is installed as libdsintercept.so.0 and thus it is not found Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): dateshift-1.1-2.fc10.x86_64 How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: Just run it, for instance: [wolfy@wolfy ~]$ dateshift -t "2001-01-20 18:00:00" date Actual results: Cannot find libdsintercept.so Expected results: Sat Jan 20 18:00:00 EET 2001 Additional info: ln /usr/lib64/libdsintercept.so.0 /usr/lib64/libdsintercept.so kind of fixes it. Here is a strace before and after ln: [wolfy@wolfy ~]$ strace -f -e open dateshift -t "2001-01-20 18:00:00" date open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/librt.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libc.so.6", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libpthread.so.0", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/etc/localtime", O_RDONLY) = 3 Cannot find libdsintercept.so [wolfy@wolfy ~]$ sudo ln /usr/lib64/libdsintercept.so.0 /usr/lib64/libdsintercept.so [wolfy@wolfy ~]$ strace -f -e open dateshift -t "2001-01-20 18:00:00" date open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/librt.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libc.so.6", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libpthread.so.0", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/etc/localtime", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/usr/lib64/libdsintercept.so", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/etc/ld.so.cache", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/librt.so.1", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libc.so.6", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libdl.so.2", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/lib64/libpthread.so.0", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/usr/lib/locale/locale-archive", O_RDONLY) = 3 open("/etc/localtime", O_RDONLY) = 3 Sat Jan 20 18:00:00 EET 2001
Upstream notified about this issue some days ago. So far no answer.
This message is a reminder that Fedora 10 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 30 (thirty) days from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 10. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained.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 WONTFIX if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '10'. 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 prior to Fedora 10's end of life. Bug Reporter: Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we may not be able to fix it before Fedora 10 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 please change the 'version' of this bug to the applicable version. If you are unable to change the version, please add a comment here and someone will do it for you. 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. The process we are following is described here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BugZappers/HouseKeeping
Fedora 10 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2009-12-17. Fedora 10 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. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.
Still reproducible on Fedora 14. Why you can't just include the link libdsintercept.so -> libdsintercept.so.0 in the package? This is easy and simple fix...
Still the same problem with fedora 19 libdsintercept.so.0 symlink is provided by dateshift-devel Is it possible to just not split dateshift package since -devel package contains nothing except this symlink?