Chris Adams writes:
Once upon a time, Sam Varshavchik <mrsam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > Chris Adams writes: > >Is there anything that actually does that and depends on the result? You skipped this part. Can you name something that tries this? I bet somebody can break it if so.
When the code is ready, I'll name it, certainly, and I'll welcome anyone to attempt to break it. But that's just a sideshow. Whether something like this can or cannot be broken does not make what prelink does any more or less sensible.
Although the problem is easily solved simply either by uninstalling prelink, or blacklisting a binary, which is just as easy, this is just sweeping the dirt under the rug. I don't think that either one is a productive solution.
I think that 99% of the problems that prelink is creating can be easily avoided simply by having prelink automatically skip executables that are currently running. This is something that should not be very difficult to do. All the information is trivially obtainable from /proc/*/exe.
This would not be perfect, this does have the obvious race conditions, but this should solve 99% of the problems that prelink creates, and 99% looks to me a whole lot better than nothing.
A 100% solution would be a generalized implementation of the hack in prelink's wrapper script that manually reexecs init. This is a fairly obvious indication that what prelink is doing is creating a problem for init. I do not believe that a convincing argument can be made that what prelink is doing is hunky-dory. If it was, /etc/cron.daily/prelink would have no reason to care about init or do anything about it. But it does. That means that it's creating a problem.
The 100% solution would be the registration mechanism that indivual binaries can install, to be invoked by prelink when it scribbles over the binary in question, so that the binary can provide whatever needs to be done in order to regain its own sanity.
But, the 100% solution is quite a bit of work. Of course, that would be the best thing to do; it's just that the 99% fix seems to be a bit more bang for the buck, at least.
Attachment:
pgpoh5LGhVD09.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
