How to make $ORIGIN in RPATH not follow symlinks?












1















I have an executable app, which depends on a library libbar.so and loads it via RPATH with $ORIGIN like this:



$ readelf -d app

Dynamic section at offset 0xe08 contains 26 entries:
Tag Type Name/Value
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libbar.so]
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
0x000000000000000f (RPATH) Library rpath: [$ORIGIN/lib/]


It would be nice to run it in the appropriate directory structure, made with symlinks to the executable and the libbar.so:



$ ls -R
.:
app@ lib/

./lib:
libbar.so@


-- but the linker follows symlinks to the original file of the executable, sets $ORIGIN to the directory of the executable file and resolves the dependency paths from there. Is it possible to make it not do this? So that directory-path-wise, in the search for lib files, the symlinks are treated as real files of the filesystem ("end-points" of the search).



Also, some reasoning to this problem:




  1. It is convenient to have binaries set up to search for dependencies in a couple relational directories, for instance in the $ORIGIN/ of a binary itself and also in $ORIGIN/appname_dependencies/ (so that one can just copy the binary and its' dependencies into one directory and run it, but also has a fall-back for a more complicated set-up with multiple versions of the same binary in the system).


  2. Due to the requirement of several dependency search paths, RPATH is the search method to use: a "slashed" name of dependency (NEEDED Shared library: [./libbar.so]) sets only 1 search path. Also, for simplicity the dependency resolution paths should be in the binary itself.



  3. It's nice to be able to combine all binaries (the application and all its' dependencies) into the full dependency graph with links, instead of copying the files. And symbolic links are more resilient than hard links: they link across filesystems. In fact, I have this problem in one academic environment of a linux cluster, where a hard link to parent directory cannot be done:



        $ ln ../afile 
    ln: creating hard link `./afile' => `../afile': Invalid cross-device link











share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
















  • Are hard links a possibility?

    – Satya Mishra
    Aug 10 '16 at 16:44











  • @SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

    – xealits
    Aug 10 '16 at 17:00
















1















I have an executable app, which depends on a library libbar.so and loads it via RPATH with $ORIGIN like this:



$ readelf -d app

Dynamic section at offset 0xe08 contains 26 entries:
Tag Type Name/Value
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libbar.so]
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
0x000000000000000f (RPATH) Library rpath: [$ORIGIN/lib/]


It would be nice to run it in the appropriate directory structure, made with symlinks to the executable and the libbar.so:



$ ls -R
.:
app@ lib/

./lib:
libbar.so@


-- but the linker follows symlinks to the original file of the executable, sets $ORIGIN to the directory of the executable file and resolves the dependency paths from there. Is it possible to make it not do this? So that directory-path-wise, in the search for lib files, the symlinks are treated as real files of the filesystem ("end-points" of the search).



Also, some reasoning to this problem:




  1. It is convenient to have binaries set up to search for dependencies in a couple relational directories, for instance in the $ORIGIN/ of a binary itself and also in $ORIGIN/appname_dependencies/ (so that one can just copy the binary and its' dependencies into one directory and run it, but also has a fall-back for a more complicated set-up with multiple versions of the same binary in the system).


  2. Due to the requirement of several dependency search paths, RPATH is the search method to use: a "slashed" name of dependency (NEEDED Shared library: [./libbar.so]) sets only 1 search path. Also, for simplicity the dependency resolution paths should be in the binary itself.



  3. It's nice to be able to combine all binaries (the application and all its' dependencies) into the full dependency graph with links, instead of copying the files. And symbolic links are more resilient than hard links: they link across filesystems. In fact, I have this problem in one academic environment of a linux cluster, where a hard link to parent directory cannot be done:



        $ ln ../afile 
    ln: creating hard link `./afile' => `../afile': Invalid cross-device link











share|improve this question
















bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.
















  • Are hard links a possibility?

    – Satya Mishra
    Aug 10 '16 at 16:44











  • @SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

    – xealits
    Aug 10 '16 at 17:00














1












1








1








I have an executable app, which depends on a library libbar.so and loads it via RPATH with $ORIGIN like this:



$ readelf -d app

Dynamic section at offset 0xe08 contains 26 entries:
Tag Type Name/Value
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libbar.so]
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
0x000000000000000f (RPATH) Library rpath: [$ORIGIN/lib/]


It would be nice to run it in the appropriate directory structure, made with symlinks to the executable and the libbar.so:



$ ls -R
.:
app@ lib/

./lib:
libbar.so@


-- but the linker follows symlinks to the original file of the executable, sets $ORIGIN to the directory of the executable file and resolves the dependency paths from there. Is it possible to make it not do this? So that directory-path-wise, in the search for lib files, the symlinks are treated as real files of the filesystem ("end-points" of the search).



Also, some reasoning to this problem:




  1. It is convenient to have binaries set up to search for dependencies in a couple relational directories, for instance in the $ORIGIN/ of a binary itself and also in $ORIGIN/appname_dependencies/ (so that one can just copy the binary and its' dependencies into one directory and run it, but also has a fall-back for a more complicated set-up with multiple versions of the same binary in the system).


  2. Due to the requirement of several dependency search paths, RPATH is the search method to use: a "slashed" name of dependency (NEEDED Shared library: [./libbar.so]) sets only 1 search path. Also, for simplicity the dependency resolution paths should be in the binary itself.



  3. It's nice to be able to combine all binaries (the application and all its' dependencies) into the full dependency graph with links, instead of copying the files. And symbolic links are more resilient than hard links: they link across filesystems. In fact, I have this problem in one academic environment of a linux cluster, where a hard link to parent directory cannot be done:



        $ ln ../afile 
    ln: creating hard link `./afile' => `../afile': Invalid cross-device link











share|improve this question
















I have an executable app, which depends on a library libbar.so and loads it via RPATH with $ORIGIN like this:



$ readelf -d app

Dynamic section at offset 0xe08 contains 26 entries:
Tag Type Name/Value
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libbar.so]
0x0000000000000001 (NEEDED) Shared library: [libc.so.6]
0x000000000000000f (RPATH) Library rpath: [$ORIGIN/lib/]


It would be nice to run it in the appropriate directory structure, made with symlinks to the executable and the libbar.so:



$ ls -R
.:
app@ lib/

./lib:
libbar.so@


-- but the linker follows symlinks to the original file of the executable, sets $ORIGIN to the directory of the executable file and resolves the dependency paths from there. Is it possible to make it not do this? So that directory-path-wise, in the search for lib files, the symlinks are treated as real files of the filesystem ("end-points" of the search).



Also, some reasoning to this problem:




  1. It is convenient to have binaries set up to search for dependencies in a couple relational directories, for instance in the $ORIGIN/ of a binary itself and also in $ORIGIN/appname_dependencies/ (so that one can just copy the binary and its' dependencies into one directory and run it, but also has a fall-back for a more complicated set-up with multiple versions of the same binary in the system).


  2. Due to the requirement of several dependency search paths, RPATH is the search method to use: a "slashed" name of dependency (NEEDED Shared library: [./libbar.so]) sets only 1 search path. Also, for simplicity the dependency resolution paths should be in the binary itself.



  3. It's nice to be able to combine all binaries (the application and all its' dependencies) into the full dependency graph with links, instead of copying the files. And symbolic links are more resilient than hard links: they link across filesystems. In fact, I have this problem in one academic environment of a linux cluster, where a hard link to parent directory cannot be done:



        $ ln ../afile 
    ln: creating hard link `./afile' => `../afile': Invalid cross-device link








symlink dynamic-linking elf






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Aug 11 '16 at 15:18







xealits

















asked Aug 10 '16 at 15:04









xealitsxealits

80811121




80811121





bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.







bumped to the homepage by Community 3 hours ago


This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed.















  • Are hard links a possibility?

    – Satya Mishra
    Aug 10 '16 at 16:44











  • @SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

    – xealits
    Aug 10 '16 at 17:00



















  • Are hard links a possibility?

    – Satya Mishra
    Aug 10 '16 at 16:44











  • @SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

    – xealits
    Aug 10 '16 at 17:00

















Are hard links a possibility?

– Satya Mishra
Aug 10 '16 at 16:44





Are hard links a possibility?

– Satya Mishra
Aug 10 '16 at 16:44













@SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

– xealits
Aug 10 '16 at 17:00





@SatyaMishra sadly no. Hard links work indeed splendidly -- they are just like regular files for the filesystem, but don't take more space -- and that's what I need. But it would be better to have symbolic links, since they can link to files across devices/filesystems.

– xealits
Aug 10 '16 at 17:00










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0














If you really want to mix symbolic links like that, you could construct a configuration like this:




  • move your executable to its own directory

  • make a symbolic link from the "normal" location to the moved executable

  • create symbolic links in the executable's directory to the shared libraries that you want to resolve






share|improve this answer
























  • but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

    – xealits
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:06











  • The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

    – Thomas Dickey
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:12











Your Answer








StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "106"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f302589%2fhow-to-make-origin-in-rpath-not-follow-symlinks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0














If you really want to mix symbolic links like that, you could construct a configuration like this:




  • move your executable to its own directory

  • make a symbolic link from the "normal" location to the moved executable

  • create symbolic links in the executable's directory to the shared libraries that you want to resolve






share|improve this answer
























  • but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

    – xealits
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:06











  • The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

    – Thomas Dickey
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:12
















0














If you really want to mix symbolic links like that, you could construct a configuration like this:




  • move your executable to its own directory

  • make a symbolic link from the "normal" location to the moved executable

  • create symbolic links in the executable's directory to the shared libraries that you want to resolve






share|improve this answer
























  • but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

    – xealits
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:06











  • The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

    – Thomas Dickey
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:12














0












0








0







If you really want to mix symbolic links like that, you could construct a configuration like this:




  • move your executable to its own directory

  • make a symbolic link from the "normal" location to the moved executable

  • create symbolic links in the executable's directory to the shared libraries that you want to resolve






share|improve this answer













If you really want to mix symbolic links like that, you could construct a configuration like this:




  • move your executable to its own directory

  • make a symbolic link from the "normal" location to the moved executable

  • create symbolic links in the executable's directory to the shared libraries that you want to resolve







share|improve this answer












share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer










answered Aug 11 '16 at 19:53









Thomas DickeyThomas Dickey

53.9k5103176




53.9k5103176













  • but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

    – xealits
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:06











  • The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

    – Thomas Dickey
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:12



















  • but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

    – xealits
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:06











  • The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

    – Thomas Dickey
    Aug 11 '16 at 23:12

















but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

– xealits
Aug 11 '16 at 23:06





but that is exactly what I want to avoid: executable file sitting in a directory together with some particular dependency libraries, so that the dependency graph is already defined. I would like to have a directory with executables and libraries of any versions, with not colliding names (hash of the content of the binary file), and the whole dependency graph could be constructed with links to particular binaries.

– xealits
Aug 11 '16 at 23:06













The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

– Thomas Dickey
Aug 11 '16 at 23:12





The libraries don't have to be in that directory. That's what I pointed out in my answer. Alternatively, you could rewrite the dynamic loader.

– Thomas Dickey
Aug 11 '16 at 23:12


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Unix & Linux Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2funix.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f302589%2fhow-to-make-origin-in-rpath-not-follow-symlinks%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

CARDNET

Boot-repair Failure: Unable to locate package grub-common:i386

濃尾地震