On 2009-03-24 00:14, Ralf Wildenhues wrote:
> * Kurt Roeckx wrote on Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:07:00PM CET:
>
>> On Mon, Mar 23, 2009 at 11:03:59PM +0200, T?r?k Edwin wrote:
>>
>>> Agreed that it can't know all places, I am just asking that is searches
>>> build location in preference of /usr/lib.
>>> If I rm libclamunrar* from /usr/lib and /usr/local/lib, then it finds it
>>> in the build dir just fine (libclamunrar_iface.la is in same directory
>>> as libclamav.so that loads it)
>>>
>>> Alternatively does ltdl support some way of checking the version of
>>> dlopened library?
>>>
>
> But that's not necessarily relevant here. The versions could be the
> same (by accident or intentional) and there would still be a problem.
> (Maybe not in your case, but generally, yes.)
>
>
>> So you think that the wrapper script should tell ltdl automaticly
>> that it was linked to an uninstalled library?
>>
>
> That's not relevant here either. We are talking about dlopened modules
> here, which may not even exist at the time the wrapper script for the
> executable has been built.
>
> Point is, ltdl cannot know which directories to search, and it currently
> does not search '.' by default. You can either use
> libtool --mode=execute -dlopen module-in-pwd.la ...
> or set LTDL_LIBRARY_PATH to contain '.'.
>
Thanks, that seems like a good solution, I can add that to the scripts
launched by make check.
I just straced the program when it works, and it picks the .so from
.libs, not from '.', so it definetely already
searches the place I want, its just that it searches it after /usr/lib:
open("/home/edwin/.local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1
ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open("/lib/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
open("/usr/lib/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such
file or directory)
open("/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No
such file or directory)
open("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1
ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open("/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1
ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open("libclamunrar_iface.la", O_RDONLY) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or
directory)
access("/home/edwin/.local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1 ENOENT
(No such file or directory)
access("/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No such file or
directory)
access("/usr/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No such file
or directory)
access("/usr/local/lib/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1 ENOENT (No
such file or directory)
access("/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1 ENOENT
(No such file or directory)
access("/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libclamunrar_iface.so", R_OK) = -1
ENOENT (No such file or directory)
open("/home/edwin/clam/git/builds/default/libclamav/.libs/libclamunrar_iface.so",
O_RDONLY) = 3
If there is some reason why the search order can't be changed, I'll
close this bug as notabug.
> Here's why I think it may not be a good idea to change ltdl so that '.'
> is searched by default by it: ltdl cannot for certain know whether it
> was launched by an uninstalled program or library. And for installed
> software to search '.' by default is a potential security risk.
>
Agreed.
Best regards,
--Edwin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
