Nils Philippsen wrote:
On Tue, 2008-08-26 at 08:39 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote:
On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 20:04 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
Hi All,
The story begins here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=446860
The problem is, or I believe it to be, that when an application uses
libgnutls-openssl (meant for easy use of porting openssl programs to gnutls)
for example because of the openssl license issues, and then a library uses the
real openssl (for example glibc through nss_ldap) then in the nss_ldap example,
the layer dlopen's nss_ldap starts using the openssl symbols from gnutls
instead of those from openssl, but they are not ABI compatible -> boom.
Luckily the list of libgnutls-openssl users seems small:
[hans@localhost src]$ repoquery -q --whatrequires
'libgnutls-openssl.so.26()(64bit)'
mcabber-0:0.9.7-1.fc10.x86_64
gnutls-0:2.4.1-1.fc10.x86_64
gnutls-devel-0:2.4.1-1.fc10.x86_64
zoneminder-0:1.23.3-1.fc10.x86_64
gkrellm-0:2.3.1-4.fc10.x86_64
So only 3 programs are affected, given that the same may happen when any used
library uses the real openssl and the application or any other library uses
gnutls-openssl, I would like to suggest the removal of libgnutls-openssl from
Fedora, as long as we have this openssl libraries mess (which we unfortunately
do) we should make sure that the various ssl libraries do not have symbol
clashes, as changes are that through a mix of libraries an application may be
using 2 (or even 3) different ssl libs.
So whats your 2 cents on this?
How does the NSS (Mozilla SSL) OpenSSL wrapper avoid this problem?
Completely uninformed guess: by using macros or other techniques to add
a prefix to the symbols that end up in the binary?
I didn't know nss has an openssl compatibility sub lib too, I just checked and
it doesn't do any symbol magic, iow it has the same problems as the gnutls
openssl compatibility sublib.
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
