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 770872 - openssl.pc contains invalid libdir
Summary: openssl.pc contains invalid libdir
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED ERRATA
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: openssl
Version: 6.4
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Tomas Mraz
QA Contact: Jiri Jaburek
URL:
Whiteboard:
: 752750 816523 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 782183 836160 840699
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-12-29 21:46 UTC by long
Modified: 2018-11-30 22:12 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version: openssl-1.0.0-27.el6
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Cause: The pkgconfig configuration files of OpenSSL libraries contained invalid libdir value. Consequence: There are no real consequences apart from the invalid libdir appearing on compilation command lines when the libdir from the OpenSSL pkgconfig files is used. Fix: The pkgconfig files were corrected to provide a correct libdir value. Result: There is no incorrect libdir value in the OpenSSL pkgconfig files anymore.
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2013-02-21 10:42:58 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2013:0443 0 normal SHIPPED_LIVE openssl bug fix update 2013-02-20 20:47:59 UTC

Description long 2011-12-29 21:46:33 UTC 
Description of problem:
/usr/lib64/pkgconfig/openssl.pc contains:

libdir=${exec_prefix}/lib6464

which is bogus

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
openssl-devel-1.0.0-20.el6.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.install openssl-devel-1.0.0-20.el6.x86_64
2.
3.
  
Actual results:
openssl.pc contains invalid value

Expected results:
openssl.pc contains valid value

Additional info:
Comment 2 Tomas Mraz 2012-01-05 14:12:24 UTC 
Yes, this is caused by the .pc fixup in the spec file that is no longer needed and thus wrong.
Comment 4 Suzanne Logcher 2012-02-14 23:25:49 UTC 
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated
in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to
address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to
ask your support representative to propose this request, if
appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux. If you would like it considered as an
exception in the current release, please ask your support
representative.
Comment 5 long 2012-02-14 23:28:52 UTC 
When you say next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux do you mean RHEL 7 or RHEL 6.3 (or whatever is next in 6.x)?
Comment 6 Tomas Mraz 2012-02-27 09:05:58 UTC 
*** Bug 752750 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 7 Tomas Mraz 2012-04-26 10:39:51 UTC 
*** Bug 816523 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Comment 8 Tomas Mraz 2012-04-26 11:16:43 UTC 
(In reply to comment #5)
> When you say next release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux do you mean RHEL 7 or
> RHEL 6.3 (or whatever is next in 6.x)?

It might be either depending on the proper prioritization of bug fixes and package errata in Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Comment 9 Tomas Mraz 2012-04-26 11:17:50 UTC 
Also if you want to raise the priority of the bug fix, please use the regular support channels (http://www.redhat.com/support) to report the problem.
Comment 10 Matt Darcy 2012-04-26 12:38:56 UTC 
I'm sorry, am I missing something here ?

there are typos in 3 files, and this "can't be updated" ?

surly this is a simple fix to the existing package, it's not a product update it's fixing 3 typos

is there something I am missing here ?
Comment 11 Tomas Mraz 2012-04-26 12:47:21 UTC 
I think you're missing the thing that every package change in Red Hat Enterprise Linux, even a simple rebuild, must go through extensive quality assurance process.
Comment 12 Matt Darcy 2012-04-26 13:36:42 UTC 
yes, I'm aware it must go through quality assurance and testing, but I'm lost at why 3 typos that are an easy fix will not be put through that process, especially for core components like SSL for security.
Comment 13 long 2012-05-02 17:58:09 UTC 
what is really funny about this is that I believe I have counted at least 5 openssl updates being released since I reported this issue.
Comment 20 Jo Rhett 2013-01-20 21:31:25 UTC 
Yes to both issues here. It's a simple fix, and there have been several openssl updates. Numerous chances to batch this in with other changes.

I would also disagree with the comments at the top: "There are no real consequences"

Um, you cannot build or rebuild RPM packages without this patch. That's a very real consequence.
Comment 22 errata-xmlrpc 2013-02-21 10:42:58 UTC 
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2013-0443.html
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.