Why does adding /usr/lib32 to LD_LIBRARY_PATH break 64-bit
binaries?
Nate Eldredge
neldredge at math.ucsd.edu
Fri Oct 24 02:49:03 UTC 2008
On Thu, 23 Oct 2008, Alexander Sack wrote:
> Alright, well I found some weirdness:
>
> [root at hagen ~]# export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/bin:/usr/lib:/usr/lib32:/usr/lib64
> [root at hagen ~]# LD_DEBUG=1 ls
> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1 is initialized, base address = 0x800506000
> RTLD dynamic = 0x80062ad78
> RTLD pltgot = 0x0
> processing main program's program header
> Filling in DT_DEBUG entry
> lm_init("(null)")
> loading LD_PRELOAD libraries
> loading needed objects
> Searching for "libutil.so.5"
> Trying "/usr/bin/libutil.so.5"
> Trying "/usr/lib/libutil.so.5"
> Trying "/usr/lib32/libutil.so.5"
> loading "/usr/lib32/libutil.so.5"
> /libexec/ld-elf.so.1: /usr/lib32/libutil.so.5: unsupported file layout
>
> That's because libutil.so.5 does not exist in /usr/lib only in /lib.
> The /usr/lib directory has:
>
> [root at hagen ~]# ls -l /usr/lib/libutil*
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 100518 Aug 21 2007 /usr/lib/libutil.a
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root wheel 17 Sep 11 11:44 /usr/lib/libutil.so ->
> /lib/libutil.so.5
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 103846 Aug 21 2007 /usr/lib/libutil_p.a
>
> So rtld is looking for major number 5 of libutil, without the standard
> /lib in my LD_LIBRARY_PATH it searches /usr/lib, doesn't find it but:
>
> [root at hagen ~]# ls -l /usr/lib32/libutil*
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 65274 Aug 21 2007 /usr/lib32/libutil.a
> lrwxrwxrwx 1 root wheel 12 Sep 11 11:45 /usr/lib32/libutil.so ->
> libutil.so.5
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 46872 Aug 21 2007 /usr/lib32/libutil.so.5
> -r--r--r-- 1 root wheel 66918 Aug 21 2007 /usr/lib32/libutil_p.a
>
> And whalah, I'm broke since there is a libutil.so.5 in there.
>
> So my question to anyone out there, WHY does /usr/lib32 contain major
> numbers but /usr/lib does not? This seems like a bug to me (FreeBSD
> 7.0-RELEASE is the same) or at least a dubious design decision.
I think the distinction is this. rtld is looking for libutil.so.5 (with
version number). This file has to be in /lib, in the root filesystem, so
that programs can run before /usr is mounted.
libutil.so on the other hand is not searched for by rtld, but by ld
(driven by cc), when the program is built. /usr/lib is the traditional
place for it to search; I'm not sure if it searches /lib at all. In the
case of static libraries, /usr/lib is certainly the right place for
libutil.a to go, so having libutil.so there makes sense in my mind.
I think your best bet is to dig into whatever is setting LD_LIBRARY_PATH
and get it set correctly. Remove /usr/lib32 or at least ensure that /lib
is searched first. Trying to change rtld's behavior is not the right
approach, IMHO.
--
Nate Eldredge
neldredge at math.ucsd.edu
More information about the freebsd-hackers
mailing list