Home | Docs | Forums | Lists | Bugs | Planet | Store | GMN | Get Gentoo!
View Bug Activity | Format For Printing | XML | Clone This Bug
Using gcc-3.1-r7, everything links to libncurses.a and libreadline.a (in /usr/lib) rather than using the shared libraries in /lib. This means that /usr/bin/less gets static ncurses, doubling its size. The quick hack solution to this problem is to move lib{ncurses|readline}.a to /tmp when compiling things like less and bc. The intermediate solution is to edit /usr/lib/gcc-lib/i686-pc-linux-gnu/3.1/specs and apply the following fix: under "link:", just before "%{rdynamic:-export-dynamic}", add "-L/lib" This adds a default -L/lib option to all linking calls, forcing /lib to be searched first. This solution could work. But a better solution may be to find out why gcc-3.1-r7 (and probably the other gcc3 ebuilds) do this and patch the gcc sources themselves.
Created an attachment (id=1909) [edit] More appropriate patch to the specs file This one should be more appropriate, as it only tells the linker to have "-L/lib" if we are linking dinamically.
I also think I have solved the .la problem (bug #4351), but more on that later on. Ill test this fix with a bootstrap && emerge system && emerge gnome to test that it is working fine. If so, ill do a masked -r8 of gcc-3.1. Anyhow, off to bed now, as it is late.
Note that using the -L/lib hack I initially mentioned (the first hack from Azarah), allows bc-1.06-r3 to build correctly.
OK, -r8 is up for grabs (masked). I am busy with a bootstrap, and will subsequently test gnome2, and maybe kde (if i can get it downloaded at work).
this is azarah's, he has a fix in portage gcc-3.1-r8, test it...
Ok, all the previous "fixes" caused ncurses among things not to link properly if an older version was already installed. The new sed rule is: # sed -e "s:%{L\*} %(link_libgcc):%{L\*} -L/lib %(link_libgcc):" specs and test fine so far. Anybody who merged -r8, please update CVS and remerge.
Azarah, gcc-3.1-r8 kills gnome-vfs, I'm working on hacking it up, but if you have thoughts I'd love to hear them
gnome-vfs and kbear... possibly others appear to have to location /usr/lib/libstdc++.la hardcoded somehow, still investigating.
Version 1.0.5 and version 2.0 of gnome-vfs works just fine here. Check that you do not have stray .la files from gcc-3.1 in /usr/lib. Not sure about kbear though.
hrm... I don't have any extra .la files... this is c00k00
Martin, Daniel brought to my attention a problem with the way that gcc-3.1-r8 solves this problem, there are times in large packages when libtool needs to link a newly compiled library against another library just compiled in the package, in this situation, the fix that you have with seding in -L /lib to the libtool script ends up breaking and grabbing the old library in /lib before it grabs the new library in the source directory. We need to actually change the sources of gcc so that it's default search order is changed probably. Unfortunately, I'm going to be flakier than a french pastry for the next month or so, so I can't be counted on to work on this issue, so I'm re-assigning the bug to you (since you had already been doing the work on it any way). thanks... --Brandon
Is there examples ? Btw .. I did check out the sources .... the lib order seems fine :( Below is sorda where I reversed it (incorrectly) to try and see if it would make a difference (just so that anybody who wanna try it before me will not have to try figuring out where to look). The prefixes is defined to the top of ${S}/gcc/gcc.c .... --------------------snip----------------------------------------- --- gcc/gcc.c.orig Wed Jul 3 22:02:54 2002 +++ gcc/gcc.c Wed Jul 3 22:03:12 2002 @@ -5922,10 +5922,10 @@ NULL, PREFIX_PRIORITY_LAST, 0, NULL); } - add_prefix (&startfile_prefixes, standard_startfile_prefix_1, - "BINUTILS", PREFIX_PRIORITY_LAST, 0, NULL); add_prefix (&startfile_prefixes, standard_startfile_prefix_2, "BINUTILS", PREFIX_PRIORITY_LAST, 0, NULL); + add_prefix (&startfile_prefixes, standard_startfile_prefix_1, + "BINUTILS", PREFIX_PRIORITY_LAST, 0, NULL); #if 0 /* Can cause surprises, and one can use -B./ instead. */ add_prefix (&startfile_prefixes, "./", NULL, PREFIX_PRIORITY_LAST, 1, NULL); ------------------------------------------------------------------------
the example that Daniel and MJC have run accross is with evms-1.1.0-pre4 I believe... it tries to link against an old library version in /lib before one that was just created in SOURCEDIR
Seems they were still using gcc-3.1-r7, and not -r8 which should be the fixed version. BTW: evms compiled fine here twice with gcc-3.1.1 (which is also fixed version, for both the libdir bug, and the .la bug that -r7 fixed for most cases, and -r8, and gcc-3.1.1 seems to fix for all).
Fixed in 3.1-r8 and likely 3.1.1, 3.2_pre
OK, this needs to be opened agian, as we are getting this again. Firstly, I will go back into the cause of this. My initial thoughts back then was that gcc3 changed handeling for library search paths. It prob does so. I now hower feel that this is not the primary cause of this, as Grant have a 1.4 system with gcc-2.95.3 with the same issues. So it may just be that it is rather the way ld (newer binutils 1.4 and -gcc3 profiles uses) now work that is causing this. The recent pam borking was a good testing ground that I think brought out the real issue behind this. To recap: We have critical system libs split between /lib and /usr/lib. The dynamic libs (.so) goes into /lib, as some critical binaries that are needed for bootup might be linked to them. Then we have the static libs (.a) in /usr/lib, as to not clutter /. What happens with the newer ld (I am only saying what basic tests want to point to, and have not really check what changed between ld 2.11 and 2.12/13), is that it seems that the search order is no longer "/lib:/usr/lib:<user defined>" but rather: "</lib and /usr/lib with user defined as influenced by -L's>" or something to that matter. Thus, when say bc compile small tests to try and detect libreadline, it finds the .a in /usr/lib *before* the .so in /lib. As it is not being linked static, it fails to link, and bc do not detect the presence of readline. With the recent pam issues, we have a "fixed" gcc, but libtool changes library search paths and calls things a bit differently, so once again the static libpam in /usr/lib is fond before the .so in /lib. Things like gdm then cannot load the pam modules (need dynamic code to use libdl to load them), and auth fails. The same for many other things that broke in the recent pam borkage. To "fix" libtool the same way as gcc was "fixed", is a one liner: -------------------------------cut------------------------------------------ --- ltmain.sh.no_gcc_lib_searchpath_fix 2002-10-24 23:07:37.000000000 +0200 +++ ltmain.sh 2002-10-24 23:07:56.000000000 +0200 @@ -751,7 +751,7 @@ finalize_shlibpath= convenience= old_convenience= - deplibs= deplibs="-L/lib" old_deplibs= compiler_flags= linker_flags= ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ This, the same with the gcc fix however is not the proper way to do it. Fix is actually real simple ... It was in front of me all the time, but I failed to "see" it. What does glibc do ? You have libc, libpthread, etc in /lib, with the static versions (if present) in /usr/lib, but it just works fine ... why ? Simple. It have unversioned symlinks in /usr/lib for all the dynamic libs in /lib. For example: -------------------------------------cut------------------------------------- nosferatu root # ls -l /lib/libc.* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 13 Oct 23 11:22 /lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.3.1.so nosferatu root # ls -l /usr/lib/libc.* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2516390 Oct 22 23:15 /usr/lib/libc.a -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 178 Oct 22 23:15 /usr/lib/libc.so nosferatu root # cat /usr/lib/libc.so /* GNU ld script Use the shared library, but some functions are only in the static library, so try that secondarily. */ GROUP ( /lib/libc.so.6 /usr/lib/libc_nonshared.a ) nosferatu root # ls -l /lib/libpthread* -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 86381 Oct 22 23:15 /lib/libpthread-0.10.so lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 Oct 23 11:22 /lib/libpthread.so.0 -> libpthread-0.10.so nosferatu root # ls -l /usr/lib/libpthread* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 94496 Oct 22 23:15 /usr/lib/libpthread.a lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 25 Oct 23 10:40 /usr/lib/libpthread.so -> ../../lib/libpthread.so.0 nosferatu root # ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- So we do not have to move all the static libs to /lib, but just add the "compat" symlinks for the dynamic versions in /usr/lib. I will start to get all the affected packages fixed, and then after a bit we can drop the gcc "fix", as it is possible that it can do some breakage.
*** Bug 9389 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 9502 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 9588 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
The solution I decided on, is to rather use linker scripts, as symlinks can be fragile. I implemented a function in eutils.eclass: --------------------------------cut------------------------------------- gen_usr_ldscript() { # Just make sure it exists dodir /usr/lib cat > ${D}/usr/lib/$1 <<"END_LDSCRIPT" /* GNU ld script Because Gentoo have critical dynamic libraries in /lib, and the static versions in /usr/lib, we need to have a "fake" dynamic lib in /usr/lib, otherwise we run into linking problems. See bug #4411 on http://bugs.gentoo.org/ for more info. */ GROUP ( /lib/libxxx ) END_LDSCRIPT dosed "s:libxxx:$1:" /usr/lib/$1 } ------------------------------------------------------------------------ For say ncurses, which have /lib/libncurses.so*, and /usr/lib/libncurses.a, you then do in src_install() after the libs have been moved in place: gen_usr_ldscript libncurses.so which will create a linker script /usr/lib/libncurses.so, pointing to the unversioned symlink /lib/libncurses.so. I though it will be better to not have it versioned, as ldconfig 'should' maintain the unversioned symlink.
OK, here is what I have updated so far: sys-apps/e2fsprogs sys-libs/ncurses sys-libs/pam sys-libs/pwdb sys-libs/readline I need some feedback on more that have dynamic libs in /lib, and static libs in /usr/lib.
*** Bug 9685 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Does gentoo use gcc 3.1 anywhere at the moment? If not, this could be marked won't fix
The last Gentoo to use 3.1 is 1.3 All in favour of WONTFIX press commit...
This bug is a marker rather. It is (or should be fixed), but it may be that some new package, or version of a package can break again. Thus I leave it open.
I suppose it's good to keep this as a note/reminder, but was it really a blocker in the first place? Wouldn't it be better to mark this bug as REMIND?
hi do we have still occurrences of this bug in the wild? if not, can we set it to CANTFIX this way it can be researched when looking for the bug at the bugzilla system without letting it open and up for grabs by the gcc bug hunters thanks, Alex
closing ... markers can be closed :)
Gentlemen, Placing ASCII text instead of ELF binaries in .so files in /usr/lib isn't a good solution. I've just ran into problems when my Common Lisp environment was trying to load /usr/lib/libz.so and complained about it not containing an ELF header. Not everyone programs in C and not everyone loads libraries the same way -- I believe in a sane system programs should be able to expect that .so files in /usr/lib will be shared libraries. Why not make them symlinks?
Yup, I just got bitten by this with a tcl/tk application that was dynamically loading libz.so. (Or should I say, trying to load libz.so.)
I have a problem emerging konsole, it complains about libhistory.so not having a proper ELF header. I have made a symlink to the real libhistory, hopefully will work, but that is not a solution tough. (In reply to comment #30) > Yup, I just got bitten by this with a tcl/tk application that was dynamically > loading libz.so. (Or should I say, trying to load libz.so.) >
I'd love to understand the reasoning behind choosing ld scripts over symlinks too... i often have to to find out whether a library is 32bit or 64bit in scripts and file -L only says "/usr/lib/libz.so: ASCII C program text", making it pretty hard to find out what bitness I will end up with when using said file. Symlinks would avoid this problem.
Looking at other distros, SuSE put: shared lib in /lib static archive in /usr/lib symlink /lib to static archive in /usr/lib symlink /usr/lib to shared lib in /lib e.g. $ ls -l /usr/lib/libacl* -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 74142 2004-06-30 19:36 /usr/lib/libacl.a -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 789 2004-06-30 19:36 /usr/lib/libacl.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 14 2006-05-30 16:48 /usr/lib/libacl.so -> /lib/libacl.so $ ls -l /lib/libacl* lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 17 2006-05-30 16:48 /lib/libacl.a -> /usr/lib/libacl.a lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 18 2006-05-30 16:48 /lib/libacl.la -> /usr/lib/libacl.la lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 11 2006-05-30 16:48 /lib/libacl.so -> libacl.so.1 lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 15 2006-05-25 11:07 /lib/libacl.so.1 -> libacl.so.1.1.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 43632 2004-06-30 19:36 /lib/libacl.so.1.1.0 Anyone care to list what Debian, RedHat do?
to be honest, i dont think we even care anymore ... our current situation doesnt have any drawbacks as far as i know shared lib in /lib static archive in /usr/lib libtool script in /usr/lib linker script in /usr/lib that points to /lib unlink symlink solutions, ours works great with cross-compilers
The linker-script solution is fine for languages and situations where you use ld to link, but it breaks dlopen(3), and therefore both programs trying to use them as plugins and many non-C languages. That includes tcl/tk, common lisp, haskell (ghci), and probably more I haven't used. The current situation is very frustrating; as it is, I have to ask people to beware of Gentoo because of it.
what are you talking about ? linker scripts do not break dlopen()
No? They certainly break ghci. I thought I'd tracked it to the dlopen call, but I guess I'll have to keep looking.
the default search path for the loader is /lib then /usr/lib so if your application is changing the search order (via broken LD_* env vars or silly RUNPATH ELF DT tags), then yes, a linker script in /usr/lib would throw an error however, this is hardly a problem specific to Gentoo as you'll find other distributions utilizing linker scripts in /usr/lib as well
