[CentOS] glibc-2.5-58.el5_6.2.i686 broken?

Tue Apr 19 10:49:59 UTC 2011
Johnny Hughes <johnny at centos.org>

On 04/18/2011 10:48 PM, Robert Heller wrote:
> At Mon, 18 Apr 2011 19:07:04 -0500 CentOS mailing list <centos at centos.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 4:16 PM, Tom Sorensen <tsorensen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> There is a known issue with one of the security updates on that
>>> version of glibc.
>>> That said, it's still *highly* recommended that you update. There are
>>> four CVEs closed by this glibc update, one of which is potentially a
>>> remote privilege escalation (and that one is NOT the one that is
>>> causing the issue).
>>> If, for some reason, you cannot update then you should seriously
>>> consider whether or not those systems can connect to the Internet, or
>>> if you should get the glibc from Scientific Linux that has the 3
>>> patches that do not cause an issue in the meantime.
>> For clarification, this bug is only known to be affecting Evolution
>> and Gnome-Panel, correct? If so, for most servers, the update should
>> not be a concern. I've updated four desktops -- the two with Intel
>> video chips are not affected at all. The two with nVidia chipsets and
>> proprietary nVidia drivers *are* affected. Since I don't use
> Are only the nVidia chipsets + *proprietary* nVidia drivers?  And only
> Evolution and Gnome-Panel?  And is it 32-bit AND 64-bit or only 32-bit
> (or only 64-bit)?
> I have a batch of 32-bit diskless workstations, powered by a 32-bit
> server (all but one uses an Intel video chip, and the last is something
> else -- not nVidia), one regular workstation (don't think it is nVidia
> either).  A 32-bit laptop with a ATI video chip and a 64-bit desktop
> with a nVidia video chip, but NOT the proprietary nVidia driver (I have
> no use for 3D accel and refuse to mess with nVidia's proprietary
> drivers).  All of these machines are still at CentOS 5.5, but I'd like
> to update them to 5.6.  Oh, the laptop and the 64-bit workstation are
> *my* machines and *I* don't use *any* desktop manager (neither GNome
> nore KDE) on either machine.
> Oh, no one uses Evolution on any of these machines (one person uses
> Thunderbird). 

I am using this gilbc on my x86_64 laptop with the proprietary NVIDIA
drivers (Quadro FX 1800M video on a Dell M4500n laptop).  I am not
having any gnome-panel issues and I do not use Evolution, so not sure
about that.

There are no issues reported where the glibc is affecting non X clients.

>> Evolution, the "work-around" for me is to issue the "pkill
>> gnome-panel" command. Usually doing this once will fix it, but
>> sometimes it requires a couple shots.
>> I dual-boot into Linux Mint 10 (so I can remotely support my father
>> who uses Linux Mint -- I need to be able to replicate his errors when
>> he has them). It has a very similar issue, except, in its case, both
>> Nautilus and Gnome-Panel do not come up. I have to go to a tty
>> terminal and issue the "pkill nautilus" and "pkill gnome-panel"
>> commands. I didn't have this problem *until* I updated the video
>> driver to nVidia's proprietary one. So, again, it appears it might
>> have something to do with the nVidia's driver.
> Hmmm.  Proprietary drivers are something I avoid... 
>> At any rate, there are work-arounds -- for those who use Evolution,
>> the SL update is probably the best. I'm kind of surprised that Red Hat
>> has not issued a fix yet.

I have built the SL version of glibc for i386/i686 and the one for
x86_64 is building now.  I stick them on
http://people.centos.org/hughesjr/ when they are done.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 253 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos/attachments/20110419/2cf0426c/attachment-0003.sig>