glibc-2.33.9000-18.fc35 with the first set of changes has been tagged into Fedora rawhide. Thanks, Florian > TL;DR: glibc 2.34 snapshots are coming. libpthread as a separate library > creates problems, so we are removing it. There may be some > hickups. Full updates with “dnf update” are recommended. > > > We expect that we will soon be able to import glibc upstream snapshots > regularly into Fedora 35 and CentOS Stream 9. We did such regular > imports for the past couple of Fedora rawhide releases, but the > situation will be slightly different, as explained below. The snapshots > will also land in CentOS Stream 9, after a delay as the result of a > different testing pipeline. > > glibc 2.33 and earlier accidentally provided an very generic ROP gadget > in the statically linked startup code that is present in every program > (even dynamically linked ones). We have removed the ROP gadget and > moved that particular initialization code into the dynamically linked > part, but that means that the interface between the startup code and the > dynamically loaded glibc parts had to change. As a result, any program > linked against glibc 2.34 will not run with glibc 2.33 or any earlier > version. (Some of you may remember the memcpy@GLIBC_2.14 issue, it was > similar.) This version requirement will be properly reflected in RPM > dependencies. > > glibc 2.34 removes libpthread as a separate library. This is based on > the observation that most processes load libpthread anyway. (On this > system, I count 141 out of 159 processes that load libpthread.) One > particularly thorny issue is that certain NSS modules depend on > libpthread, and if the main program is not linked (indirectly) against > libpthread, loading such NSS modules effectively loads libpthread via > dlopen, which is something that glibc has never supported well. > Furthermore, the availability of some pthread_* functions without > -lpthread has been a source of confusion to developers, resulting in > both overlinking and underlinking. > > We started the libpthread transition in glibc 2.33 when we added the > __libc_single_threaded variable as a replacement for the weak symbol > hacks that some libraries use to detect single-threaded processes. (For > example, libstdc++ used to do this to avoid using atomic instructions in > std::shared_ptr.) Backwards compatibility for dynamically linked > binaries should be preserved (as usual), but we know of one issue on > ppc64le, where the weak symbol hacks resulted in slightly corrupt > binaries. Upstream glibc did not accept the proposed backwards > compatibility enhancement so far. Instead, we will rebuild affected > distribution binaries with a binutils version which handles weak symbols > slightly differently, avoiding the corruption. As we plan to perform > these rebuilds before the new glibc lands in the buildroot, the > requirement to upgrade to the new binaries before or at the same time of > the upgrade to the glibc upstream snapshot will NOT be reflected in RPM > dependencies. A full upgrade using “dnf update” will work, however. > > In addition to the removal of libpthread, I also hope to remove libdl > and librt. This means that new GLIBC_2.34 symbols will be added to > libc.so.6 (e.g., timer_create@GLIBC_2.34). The librt removal in > particular will probably not land with the first imported snapshot. > This is unfortunate because RPM does not have a way to express this: > there's just a blanket Provides: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.34), which will > already be included in the first snapshot that adds the symbol > __lib_start_main@@GLIBC_2.34 (whether or not the RPM package includes > timer_create@GLIBC_2.34 as well). Some tools in the fedpkg/centpkg/mock > sphere try to install builds from the Koji buildroot into installations > from composes, without upgrading everything to the current buildroot, so > it's possible that glibc won't be upgraded to match the requirements of > RPMs directly imported from the buildroot. Developers encountered > similar issues with glibc snapshot imports (e.g., around the symbol > pthread_getattr_np). Our RPM infrastructure does not have per-symbol > dependencies, so there isn't much we can do about it at the packaging > level. It's a transitory issue during rawhide/CentOS Stream 9 > development; the finished release will add all GLIBC_2.34 symbols in one > upgrade, so end users won't see it in a Fedora 34 to Fedora 35 upgrade > or a CentOS Stream 8 to CentOS Stream 9 upgrade. > > We think there is value in providing access to these snapshots early, > and will try to make the transitions as smooth as possible, within the > constraints outlined above. > > Thanks, > Florian _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
