openjdk-6-dbg has no executable files

Bug #689029 reported by C Erler
8
This bug affects 1 person
Affects Status Importance Assigned to Milestone
openjdk-6 (Ubuntu)
Invalid
Undecided
Unassigned

Bug Description

The package openjdk-6-dbg installs a bunch of files, none of which are set executable.

For instance, in /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk/jre/bin,
total 1292
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-12-11 13:25 ./
drwxr-xr-x 4 root root 4096 2010-12-11 13:25 ../
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 92291 2010-11-23 01:30 java
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 92979 2010-11-23 01:30 javaws.real
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91490 2010-11-23 01:30 keytool
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91576 2010-11-23 01:30 orbd
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91580 2010-11-23 01:30 pack200
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91454 2010-11-23 01:30 pluginappletviewer
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91490 2010-11-23 01:30 policytool
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91490 2010-11-23 01:30 rmid
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91490 2010-11-23 01:30 rmiregistry
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91490 2010-11-23 01:30 servertool
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 91576 2010-11-23 01:30 tnameserv
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 275890 2010-11-23 01:30 unpack200

Furthermore, if I run `sudo chmod a+x java`, the executable fails to start with the message
    bash: ./java: cannot execute binary file

`file java` reports
    java: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.15, not stripped

Please either correct this so that all files that are supposed to execute do execute properly or update the aptitude package description to include information on why this package has no executable files.

ProblemType: Bug
DistroRelease: Ubuntu 10.10
Package: openjdk-6-dbg 6b20-1.9.2-0ubuntu1
ProcVersionSignature: Ubuntu 2.6.35-23.41-generic 2.6.35.7
Uname: Linux 2.6.35-23-generic i686
Architecture: i386
Date: Sat Dec 11 14:02:01 2010
InstallationMedia: Ubuntu 10.10 "Maverick Meerkat" - Release i386 (20101007)
ProcEnviron:
 LANG=en_US.utf8
 SHELL=/bin/bash
SourcePackage: openjdk-6

Revision history for this message
C Erler (erlercw) wrote :
Revision history for this message
Marcel Stimberg (marcelstimberg) wrote :

Thank you for your bug report. The openjdk-6-dbg package is not supposed to contain any executable files. -dbg packages are debug packages and only contain the "debug symbols" useful when trying to debug a program crash (https://wiki.ubuntu.com/DebuggingProgramCrash) in a "normal" package. Everything you need for standard use is in the openjdk-6-jre (for executing java programs), openjdk-6-jdk (for writing java programs), etc. packages.
The package description already contains the sentence "This package contains the debugging symbols.".

Changed in openjdk-6 (Ubuntu):
status: New → Invalid
Revision history for this message
C Erler (erlercw) wrote :

Ahh, thank you for the explanation :). That helps to make aptitude much more sensible to me.

For those new to aptitude like me that aren't aware of what "-dbg" signifies, I think there's some unnecessary ambiguity in that sentence, as "contains" can mean either "also contains" (i.e., has all the executables ready to go, but they're nicely unstripped) or "contains only" (i.e., has debugging symbols only). I think the ambiguity could be completely removed if the sentence you mentioned was changed to something like "This package contains nothing but the debugging symbols of other packages."

I realize this may not be the correct place to make this suggestion. If it's not, can you please direct me to a more appropriate place?

Revision history for this message
Matthias Klose (doko) wrote : Re: [Openjdk] [Bug 689029] Re: openjdk-6-dbg has no executable files

On 12.12.2010 23:01, C Erler wrote:
> Ahh, thank you for the explanation :). That helps to make aptitude much
> more sensible to me.
>
> For those new to aptitude like me that aren't aware of what "-dbg"
> signifies, I think there's some unnecessary ambiguity in that sentence,
> as "contains" can mean either "also contains" (i.e., has all the
> executables ready to go, but they're nicely unstripped) or "contains
> only" (i.e., has debugging symbols only). I think the ambiguity could be
> completely removed if the sentence you mentioned was changed to
> something like "This package contains nothing but the debugging symbols
> of other packages."

not always true. python-*-dbg packages contain both extensions for the
python-dbg interpreter and debug information for extensions for the python
interpreter.

To post a comment you must log in.
This report contains Public information  
Everyone can see this information.

Other bug subscribers

Remote bug watches

Bug watches keep track of this bug in other bug trackers.