https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079295
Jonas Ådahl <jadahl(a)redhat.com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value
CC| |jadahl(a)redhat.com
--- Comment #2 from Jonas Ådahl <jadahl(a)redhat.com> ---
This issue breaks using `virtme-run` with -script-sh or -script-exec, as that
works by copying the assumingly static /usr/sbin/busybox into a initramfs where
it will assume it'll work without external shared objects. It doesn't, however,
unless one *also* copies /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 into /lib in the initramfs.
Doing that, I'd say is a work around, one should be able to assume
/usr/sbin/busybox is a static executable, can one not, assuming no
busybox-shared etc is installed.
This applies to F36 too. Should I clone this bug for F36?
Some other observations:
In F35, `ldd /usr/sbin/busybox` gives me "not a dynamic executable" while on
F36 I get
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffc89161000)
ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 => /lib/ld-musl-x86_64.so.1 (0x00007fa94925e000)
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2079295