** Changed in: command-not-found
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/335666
Title:
libc6 integration gives way wrong error message to libc5 binaries.
Which manpage should be improved?
Indeed you are technically correct that the obscure ld.so file is not
found.
It is too bad that the error message cannot tell the name of the file it
was looking for so as to provide both accurate and useful information.
Perhaps the fix is not to change a man pag
Seems the patch was NACK'd upstream - http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/11/133
"NAK. Current behaviour is useful -- and it is really file thats
missing.
Please improve manpage instead.
(chmod 000 /lib also produces 'interesting' error messages. Better
document those, too)."
** Changed in: linux (Ubun
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: linux (Ubuntu)
Status: New => Triaged
--
libc6 integration gives way wrong error message to libc5 binaries.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/335666
You received this bug notification because you are a member of
I've submitted a longer version of the patch above to the LKML:
http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/7/9/74
--
libc6 integration gives way wrong error message to libc5 binaries.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/335666
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subsc
I agree that getting a more helpful message is important.
Still given the complexity and required dependencies I'll rather wait
for a consensus / upstream help for this one
** Also affects: command-not-found
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: command-not-found
Importan
I looked at it from a command-not-found perspective and we would have to
modify the internal bash code that calls the command-not-found function
to deal with this as well. It sounds to me like the proposed kernel
patch is a better solution (also it would be a nice feature to integrate
that with co
This patch does not appear to be upstream. It creates a significant
amount of extra work for the Ubuntu kernel team to maintain out of tree
patches. As such they typically require patches to be submitted and
accepted upstream first. Do you know if the patch referenced here has
gone upstream? Pl
** Also affects: linux (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
libc6 integration gives way wrong error message to libc5 binaries.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/335666
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
--
So I was looking into two workarounds for this.
One is a stub ld-linux.so.5 that gets mad at you and exits. If you just
compile a short program that write()s an error message with gcc -static
-fPIC, it "works" as an interpreter.
The other option, which I think is a little more suitable, is to add
One other manifestation of the problem is that if you try and find out
what libraries the binary wants by using ldd, you get the same wrong
error mesage. Instead of saying it wants to link against libc5, it says
the the binary being examined does not exist.
Perhaps the place to address the issue
Ugh.
The problem here is that if you execve() a binary whose interpreter is
missing, then the kernel just gives you ENOENT. I'm not sure that
dropping in stub interpreters for anything that might need to exist is a
good solution here.
Maybe this would be better fixed at the command-not-found leve
12 matches
Mail list logo
