Launchpad has imported 8 comments from the remote bug at https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=97226.
If you reply to an imported comment from within Launchpad, your comment will be sent to the remote bug automatically. Read more about Launchpad's inter-bugtracker facilities at https://help.launchpad.net/InterBugTracking. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2016-08-06T13:12:36+00:00 David Faure wrote: /usr/bin/ls: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 3.0.0, BuildID[sha1]=339279bdac0d1a8c98b6bbb92afc8d8edb185d9f, stripped This file is detected as application/x-sharedlib instead of application/x-executable, by the s-m-i test suite, if I add it there. Patch for the test suite: http://www.davidfaure.fr/kde/smi.diff + downloading http://www.davidfaure.fr/kde/ls into tests/. Result: ls, 'data' test: expected application/x-executable, got application/x-sharedlib ls, 'file' test: expected application/x-executable, got application/x-sharedlib There must be a bug in the ELF magic for application/x-sharedlib and/or application/x-executable. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/0 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2016-08-06T13:17:24+00:00 Bugzilla-x wrote: Or you could just dump the file into the staging-tests/ directory, and run "make local-test". Patch welcome, but I wonder how useful that magic (or lack of accuracy) actually is. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/1 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2016-08-06T18:05:51+00:00 David Faure wrote: Well we need a way to find out that /bin/ls is an executable, and there's no extension, so working magic would be useful ;) However I don't know anything about the ELF file format, so I don't know what the problem actually is (and whether it offers reliable magic). Admittedly the magic for x-sharedlib is the one that's much less useful, shared libs are typically called *.so or *.so.[0-9\.]* :-) But I wouldn't dare just removing all magic from x-sharedlib... unless someone can prove that the ELF file format makes no actual difference between shared libs and executables? Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/2 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2017-01-05T01:25:47+00:00 Alan Coopersmith wrote: The ELF file format distinguishes between traditional executables and shared objects, but unfortunately PIE executables are treated as ELF shared objects Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/9 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2017-01-14T16:16:09+00:00 Yann Droneaud wrote: AFAIK, a shared object could be a PIE program if it has a (valid) interpretor header (PT_INTERP). It should be noted that glibc's ELF loader (ld-linux.so, exact name depending on architecture) is a shared object and a valid program, but doesn't have an interpretor header, but that's the only exception I aware of. IOTH, glibc's libc.so is a shared object with a valid interpretor, making it a valid program (try it !). Reporting such library as a program might be misleading for end user. Anyway, PT_INTERP header not at a fixed location in the ELF file, so it cannot be described in shared-mime-info database. (It's a pity PIE ELF files were not describe with a new ELF type or at least a flag :( Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/10 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2017-09-06T21:34:59+00:00 dkg wrote: This has been open for over a year, and is related to even older bugs in tools that depend on shared-mime-info (e.g. https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=737849 ). This is also an issue in libmagic, and there is more discussion about ELF over there: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296868 It'd be great to have some sort of resolution here. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/11 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2017-09-06T21:39:53+00:00 Bugzilla-x wrote: (In reply to Daniel Kahn Gillmor from comment #5) > It'd be great to have some sort of resolution here. That's not going to happen unless somebody has a patch. Reading comment 4, that seems unlikely. If you have applications that require this deep level of knowledge of the different formats, you'll probably want to use something more precise than the shared-mime spec. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/12 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ On 2018-10-13T10:36:34+00:00 Gitlab-migration wrote: -- GitLab Migration Automatic Message -- This bug has been migrated to freedesktop.org's GitLab instance and has been closed from further activity. You can subscribe and participate further through the new bug through this link to our GitLab instance: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/xdg /shared-mime-info/issues/11. Reply at: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/shared-mime- info/+bug/1639531/comments/13 ** Changed in: shared-mime-info Status: Confirmed => Unknown ** Bug watch added: Red Hat Bugzilla #1296868 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1296868 -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to shared-mime-info in Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1639531 Title: GCC compiles programs to shared object instead of executable, preventing GUI file managers from executing programs Status in gcc-defaults: Unknown Status in shared-mime-info: Unknown Status in shared-mime-info package in Ubuntu: Triaged Bug description: Release of Ubuntu being used ============================ Description: Ubuntu 16.10 Release: 16.10 Version of the package being used ================================= gcc: Installed: 4:6.1.1-1ubuntu2 Candidate: 4:6.1.1-1ubuntu2 Version table: *** 4:6.1.1-1ubuntu2 500 500 http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu yakkety/main amd64 Packages 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status What was expected ================= Programs compiled using `gcc -o program program.c` should be runnable by double-clicking them from a GUI file manager. Compiling a simple program (`void main() { }`) using Xubuntu 16.04's current version of `gcc` (`gcc version 5.4.0 20160609 (Ubuntu 5.4.0-6ubuntu1~16.04.2)`) produces the following output from `/usr/bin/file program`: program: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=signature_here, not stripped This is correct behavior, allowing the executables to run from Nautilus and Thunar. What happened instead ===================== Programs compiled using `gcc -o program program.c` are not runnable by double-clicking them from a GUI file manager, even though they are runnable from the terminal. Compiling a simple program (`void main() { }`) using the current version of `gcc` (`6.2.0 20161005 (Ubuntu 6.2.0-5ubuntu12)`) produces the following output from `/usr/bin/file program`: program: ELF 64-bit LSB shared object, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, for GNU/Linux 2.6.32, BuildID[sha1]=signature_here, not stripped The program is also identified as a "shared library" instead of an "executable" in Thunar, causing it to not be runnable from the GUI. Others are unable to run such programs from Nautilus. To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/gcc-defaults/+bug/1639531/+subscriptions -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages Post to : touch-packages@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~touch-packages More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
