RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 651091 - ppc64: rpm prefers 32bit binaries in multilib pkgs
Summary: ppc64: rpm prefers 32bit binaries in multilib pkgs
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: anaconda
Version: 6.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Anaconda Maintenance Team
QA Contact: Martin Banas
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 701605 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2010-11-08 19:44 UTC by Miroslav Vadkerti
Modified: 2018-05-01 15:43 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

Fixed In Version: anaconda-13.21.84-1
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
anaconda in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 for Power writes an incorrect value to /etc/rpm/macros that can cause issues when installing 32 and 64-bit PowerPC packages together. Users are advised to remove this file after installation.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-05-19 12:52:47 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
IBM Linux Technology Center 68223 0 None None None Never
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2011:0530 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE anaconda bug fix and enhancement update 2011-05-18 17:44:52 UTC

Description Miroslav Vadkerti 2010-11-08 19:44:03 UTC 
Description of problem:
# rpm -q openssl
openssl-1.0.0-4.el6_0.1.ppc
openssl-1.0.0-4.el6_0.1.ppc64
# file /usr/bin/openssl 
/usr/bin/openssl: ELF 32-bit MSB executable, PowerPC or cisco 4500, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.18, with unknown capability 0x41000000 = 0x13676e75, with unknown capability 0x10000 = 0xb0401, stripped

In RHEL6 the preferred version should by the 64b ELF as on other multilib archs 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rpm-4.8.0-12.el6

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
see desc
  
Actual results:
32b elf preferred

Expected results:
64b elf preffered


Additional info:
Comment 1 Bill Nottingham 2010-11-08 19:55:41 UTC 
This is due to anaconda writing /etc/rpm/macros on ppc64 with _prefer_color=1.
Comment 2 Bill Nottingham 2010-11-08 19:55:41 UTC 
    Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field
    accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team.
    
    New Contents:
anaconda in Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 for Power writes an incorrect value to /etc/rpm/macros that can cause issues when installing 32 and 64-bit PowerPC packages together. Users are advised to remove this file after installation.
Comment 4 Chris Lumens 2010-11-12 15:04:54 UTC 
This is fixed by ba9df81a15eedcfae49c8332d30f53cfa27e2288.
Comment 5 RHEL Program Management 2010-11-12 15:19:48 UTC 
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for inclusion
in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux maintenance release. Product Management has 
requested further review of this request by Red Hat Engineering, for potential
inclusion in a Red Hat Enterprise Linux Update release for currently deployed 
products. This request is not yet committed for inclusion in an Update release.
Comment 9 Martin Banas 2011-03-29 13:15:11 UTC 
rpm -qa --queryformat="%{NAME}\n"| sort | uniq -c | awk '$1>1 { print $2 }' | while read i ; do rpm -ql $i | egrep '(s?bin)|(libexec)' ; done | while read file ; do test -x $file && echo $file ; done | sort -u | while read file ; do file $file | grep -q 32-bit && echo $file ; done
/usr/bin/gdk-pixbuf-query-loaders-32
/usr/bin/gtk-query-immodules-2.0-32
/usr/bin/pango-querymodules-32
/usr/libexec/getconf/POSIX_V6_ILP32_OFF32
/usr/libexec/getconf/POSIX_V6_ILP32_OFFBIG
/usr/libexec/getconf/POSIX_V7_ILP32_OFF32
/usr/libexec/getconf/POSIX_V7_ILP32_OFFBIG
/usr/sbin/glibc_post_upgrade.ppc
/usr/sbin/iconvconfig.ppc


All of them above have their 64 binaries, so it seems it's OK.
Retested on RHEL6.1-20110317.1 @Everything package set, moving the bug to VERIFIED.
Comment 10 John W. Lockhart 2011-05-03 15:41:11 UTC 
*** Bug 701605 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 11 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 12:52:47 UTC 
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0530.html
Comment 12 errata-xmlrpc 2011-05-19 12:52:48 UTC 
An advisory has been issued which should help the problem
described in this bug report. This report is therefore being
closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For more information
on therefore solution and/or where to find the updated files,
please follow the link below. You may reopen this bug report
if the solution does not work for you.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-0530.html
Comment 13 IBM Bug Proxy 2018-05-01 15:43:30 UTC 
------- Comment From hannsj_uhl.com 2018-05-01 11:32 EDT-------
.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.