News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on “Shared libraries are not a good thing in general”. Parent comment

Re:“Shared libraries are not a good thing in general” by totony on Sunday May 02, 2021 @06:00AM (#27013801)
>If one program on your system depends on a quirk of libfoobar-1.0.3, and another program on your system depends on a quirk of libfoobar-1.0.4, you're fucked.

Why? You can have both e.g. /lib/libfoobar-1.0.4.so /lib/libfoobar-1.0.3.so

Usually you would have /lib/libfoobar-1.so -> /lib/libfoobar-1.0.4.so, but it doesn't prevent you from linking the problematic program directly with libfoobar-1.0.3

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:“Shared libraries are not a good thing in general” by runiq on Sunday May 02, 2021 @06:19AM (#27013883)
> but it doesn't prevent you from linking the problematic program directly with libfoobar-1.0.3

I feel that patchelf[0] is an ingenious little tool for exactly that purpose that isn't getting enough love. Not as useful for FOSS stuff, but it's been really useful for the times I had to relink proprietary things on our cluster in order to patch a security vulnerability or two.

[0] https://github.com/NixOS/patchelf

[ Parent | on HN ]