[CORE-10546] Change rpm install order to fix 'undefined symbol: xtables_strdup' #9022
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…es_strdup' `microdnf install iproute-tc nftables` would install `iptables-libs` 1.8.5-11.el8_9 as a dependency, and it provides `/lib64/libxtables.so.12.3.0`. When using that `.so` file with `LD_PRELOAD`, we can consistently reproduce the issue: ``` LD_PRELOAD=/lib64/libxtables.so.12.3.0 iptables-legacy-save iptables-legacy-save: symbol lookup error: iptables-legacy-save: undefined symbol: xtables_strdup ``` The problem was, during our build process, we build iptables (and iptables-libs) v1.8.8 and install with `rpm --force`, but that doesn´t remove the outdated v1.8.5. By moving things around in the Dockerfiles and installing iptables-libs 1.8.8 before iproute-tc and nftables, the problematic 1.8.5 package is no longer installed and thus the correct `.so` file should be used (`libxtables.so.12.6.0` at the time of writing this).
coutinhop
added
release-note-required
This was referenced Jul 18, 2024
coutinhop
added
cherry-pick-completed
|
I can confirm that this resolves the issue with |
hjiawei
reviewed
Jul 18, 2024
node/Dockerfile.amd64
Outdated
| # Install compatible libnftnl version with selected iptables version | ||
| rpm -i /tmp/rpms/iptables-legacy-${IPTABLES_VER}.el8.2.x86_64.rpm && \ | ||
| # Install iptables-libs via rpm. The libs must installed before installing iproute-tc and nftables via 'microdnf install' | ||
| # otherwise they will pull an outdated version of iptables-libs (1.8.5-11.el8_9) as a dependency. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
1.8.5-11.el8_9 version number may change in the future. This comment can get outdated soon-ish. Maybe we can remove the version? How do we handle future cases when iptables-libs from the system repository is newer than what we build (1.8.8)?
hjiawei
approved these changes
Jul 18, 2024
hjiawei
reviewed
Jul 19, 2024
| RUN microdnf --enablerepo=baseos install iproute-tc nftables | ||
|
|
||
| # Install iptables via rpm. Install compatible libnftnl version with the selected iptables version | ||
| RUN rpm --force -i /tmp/rpms/libnftnl-${LIBNFTNL_VER}.el8.aarch64.rpm && \ |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
microdnf install iproute-tc nftableswould installiptables-libs1.8.5-11.el8_9 as a dependency, and it provides/lib64/libxtables.so.12.3.0. When using that.sofile withLD_PRELOAD, we can consistently reproduce the issue:The problem was, during our build process, we build iptables (and iptables-libs) v1.8.8 and install with
rpm --force, but that doesn´t remove the outdated v1.8.5. By moving things around in the Dockerfiles and installing iptables-libs 1.8.8 before iproute-tc and nftables, the problematic 1.8.5 package is no longer installed and thus the correct.sofile should be used (libxtables.so.12.6.0at the time of writing this).Description
Related issues/PRs
fixes #8831 (tentatively, pending user confirmation)
Todos
Release Note
Reminder for the reviewer
Make sure that this PR has the correct labels and milestone set.
Every PR needs one
docs-*label.docs-pr-required: This change requires a change to the documentation that has not been completed yet.docs-completed: This change has all necessary documentation completed.docs-not-required: This change has no user-facing impact and requires no docs.Every PR needs one
release-note-*label.release-note-required: This PR has user-facing changes. Most PRs should have this label.release-note-not-required: This PR has no user-facing changes.Other optional labels:
cherry-pick-candidate: This PR should be cherry-picked to an earlier release. For bug fixes only.needs-operator-pr: This PR is related to install and requires a corresponding change to the operator.