[Mageia-dev] executable libraries

Sat Mar 10 22:29:50 CET 2012

Den 13:45 3. mars 2012 skrev Guillaume Rousse
+<guillomovitch at gmail.com> følgende:
+> Le 02/03/2012 22:01, Per Øyvind Karlsen a écrit :
+>
+>> 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
+>
+> I don't much point to a check, when a rpm-helper scriptlet would be able to
+> automatically enforce any given permission set.
+I eventually reached that conclusion as well, especially as I ran into
+same issues with mono
+libraries as well..
+
+I've just pushed a new spec-helper to cooker with the following script:
+http://svn.mandriva.com/viewvc/soft/rpm/spec-helper/trunk/fix_file_permissions?view=markup
+
+--
+Regards,
+Per Øyvind
+