Le Mon, 11 Nov 2013 09:40:52 +0100, Sven Hartge <s...@svenhartge.de> a écrit :
> On 11.11.2013 09:34, Laurent Bigonville wrote: > > Le Mon, 11 Nov 2013 09:26:38 +0100, > > Sven Hartge <s...@svenhartge.de> a écrit : > > > >> On 11.11.2013 09:22, Laurent Bigonville wrote: > >>> Le Mon, 11 Nov 2013 09:13:46 +0100, Sven Hartge > >>> <s...@svenhartge.de> a écrit : > >> > >>>> I see you reverted the fix you made and reassigned the bug to > >>>> eglibc6 with the commend "affected software needs to be > >>>> recompiled". > >> > >>>> I don't know if I like this "solution". What, if I am not able to > >>>> recompile an affected program? > >> > >>> A binNMU for smartmontools has just been schedule. > >>> > >>> The new rebuilt version (6.2+svn3841-1+b1) of smartmontools should > >>> arrive soon on the archive. > >> > >> All fine and dandy, but what if I have a software showing the same > >> problem, where I am not able to recompile, because I don't have any > >> source code for said software? (This is a hypotethical case.) > > > > Calling ldd /usr/sbin/smartctl was also triggering the same > > assertion. > > > > I tired to run ldd on all the executables that are depending against > > libselinux and only the executables from the smartmontools package > > were showing this issue, so the other packages in the > > archive /should/ be safe. > > Everything from the package pools of Debian may be safe, yes. > > But there are other programs from third party vendors, which may show > the same problem, which cannot be rebuild, because they are > proprietary software. What about them? The only versions of libselinux that have been compiled against libpthread are 2.1.13(all revisions) and 2.2-2 The version from wheezy and even squeeze were not, so there is no regressions between stable release here. > The way I see it is that libselinux1 and/or libc6 changed in an > binary-incompatible way and should be fixed in a way which does not > require a rebuild of eventually affected software. Well here it's not a simple ABI change, the loader itself is asserting, that's why I've reassigned the bug to eglibc. Cheers, Laurent Bigonville -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
