[Mageia-dev] executable libraries

Fri Mar 2 22:01:29 CET 2012

Den 21:51 2. mars 2012 skrev Maarten Vanraes <alien at rmail.be> følgende:
+> Op vrijdag 02 maart 2012 21:29:05 schreef Anssi Hannula:
+>> 02.03.2012 21:57, Maarten Vanraes kirjoitti:
+>> > Op vrijdag 02 maart 2012 15:22:23 schreef Anssi Hannula:
+>> >> 02.03.2012 00:17, Maarten Vanraes kirjoitti:
+>> >>> Op donderdag 01 maart 2012 23:05:35 schreef Anssi Hannula:
+>> >>> [...]
+>> >>>
+>> >>>>> does this mean debug info fails for these?
+>> >>>>
+>> >>>> I'm not immediately sure (I never remember how the debug/stripping
+>> >>>> stuff works exactly), but I think either a) debug symbols extraction
+>> >>>> and thus -debug packaging, b) stripping, or c) both will fail with
+>> >>>> non-executable shared libs.
+>> >>>
+>> >>> in that case i guess we would need a policy or bs check to make sure we
+>> >>> don't fail some libraries debug and strip
+>> >>
+>> >> Possibly.
+>> >>
+>> >> Interestingly, Debian policy disallows executable permission on shared
+>> >> libs:
+>> >> http://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-sharedlibs.html#s-sharedlibs-
+>> >> ru ntime
+>> >>
+>> >> "Shared libraries should not be installed executable, since the dynamic
+>> >> linker does not require this and trying to execute a shared library
+>> >> usually results in a core dump."
+>> >
+>> > which is sort of strange, since libc is actually executable by design.
+>> >
+>> > i see where they are coming from
+>> >
+>> > but i guess the first part of this is, why is there a find with
+>> > executable restrictions for the code relating to stripped binaries and
+>> > debug?
+>> >
+>> > is it because it's also used for real executables?
+>>
+>> I guess it is there just to speed up the process, otherwise it would
+>> have to run 'file' for every file in the package (and many packages have
+>> lots of files).
+>
+> still, it seems kind of weird, there are rpmlint checks for unstripped
+> libraries, but i do have 34 libraries not marked as executable, while the
+> stripping+ debug seems to target only executables?
+>
+> i wonder if we should make another check library unset as executable or even
+> check what happened with these libraries not marked as executable?
+I posted a link to a rpmlint patch implementing such a check to this thread two
+hours ago.. :p
+
+--
+Regards,
+Per Øyvind
+