bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Haider Mirza]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 852 bytes --]

I am trying to run a binary and it returns
"bash: ./silent-syphon: No such file or directory"

This issue does not seem to happen on other distros (tested on 
Archlinux) and has been reproduced on several GNU Guix 
installations.
This error has occured before and every both times the binary was 
originally found in a zip file.
I unzip the file with "unzip foo". Using the unzip program.

Easiest way to reproduce this by unzipping the binary in this 
Github repo:
https://github.com/FluxHarmonic/ld50-silent-syphon/releases/tag/dev

The internet suggests that this might be because I am running a 
32-bit program on a 64-bit system.
LDD shows the binary to be fine and error continued to happen even 
after installing all dependancies/libraries.
I am on the Guix Operating system with everything being 
up-to-date.

Can you suggest any sort of fix?


[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 971 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 49 bytes --]

-- 
Haider Mirza via Emacs on a GNU/Linux system

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Maxime Devos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1014 bytes --]

Haider Mirza schreef op do 14-04-2022 om 16:34 [+0100]:
> I am trying to run a binary and it returns "bash: ./silent-syphon: No
> such file or directory"
> This issue does not seem to happen on other distros (tested on
> Archlinux) and has been reproduced on several GNU Guix installations.
> This error has occured before and every both times the binary was
> originally found in a zip file. I unzip the file with "unzip foo".
> Using the unzip program.

It probably uses /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 or the like which does not
exist on Guix.  What is the interpreter according to "readelf -l
silent-python"? (look for ‘Requesting program interpreter: ’ in the
output).  What does 'stat THE-INTERPRETER’ say?

> LDD shows the binary to be fine and error continued to happen even
> after installing all dependancies/libraries.

'ldd' is not perfect.  As an additional test, could be to do "strace
./silent-python", maybe it tells you which file could not be found.

Greetings,
Maxime


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Maxime Devos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 355 bytes --]

Haider Mirza schreef op do 14-04-2022 om 16:34 [+0100]:
> Easiest way to reproduce this by unzipping the binary in this Github
> repo: 
> https://github.com/FluxHarmonic/ld50-silent-syphon/releases/tag/dev

I'm not running random binaries.  Anyway, AFAICT, this is not (yet?)
free software, so I'm considering to close this?

Greetings,
Maxime.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Bengt Richter]

Hi Maxime & Haider,

(This is not to accuse you Haider, who I don't know, of probing Maxime
-- but consider the seemingly casual example you are setting for noobs
in suggesting running an unknown (to others) binary).

On +2022-04-16 15:32:44 +0200, Maxime Devos wrote:
> Haider Mirza schreef op do 14-04-2022 om 16:34 [+0100]:
> > Easiest way to reproduce this by unzipping the binary in this Github
> > repo: 
> > https://github.com/FluxHarmonic/ld50-silent-syphon/releases/tag/dev
> 
> I'm not running random binaries.  Anyway, AFAICT, this is not (yet?)
> free software, so I'm considering to close this?
> 
> Greetings,
> Maxime.

In [0]:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
The con starts off as many that target individuals do
nowadays: With a text message. In this case it's not a
phishing attempt, it's an attempt to ascertain whether the
person receiving the message is susceptible to further
manipulation.
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

[0]  https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/15/the_latest_scam_pay_yourself/

So, Maxime, ["I'm not running random binaries."] you are apparently not
"susceptible to further manipulation." :)

Good for you, but what about warning less sophisticated guix noobs more actively?

-- 
Regards,
Bengt Richter

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Haider Mirza]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

> (This is not to accuse you Haider, who I don't know, of probing Maxime
> -- but consider the seemingly casual example you are setting for noobs
> in suggesting running an unknown (to others) binary).

Sorry about that, usually Github Repositories ask for some way to
reproduce a bug so they can try and debug it. I had expected him to
have ran the binary in a VM. But like you said it might not be apparent
to the less experienced. 

> The con starts off as many that target individuals do
> nowadays: With a text message. In this case it's not a
> phishing attempt, it's an attempt to ascertain whether the
> person receiving the message is susceptible to further
> manipulation.

Looking back, that really did seem quite manipulative, worse with the
repository not even with a license. Thanks for spotting this out and
making me realize my mistake.

All the best,
Haider.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 857 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Maxime Devos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1131 bytes --]

Haider Mirza schreef op wo 20-04-2022 om 20:46 [+0100]:
> > (This is not to accuse you Haider, who I don't know, of probing
> Maxime
> > -- but consider the seemingly casual example you are setting for
> noobs
> > in suggesting running an unknown (to others) binary).
> 
> Sorry about that, usually Github Repositories ask for some way to
> reproduce a bug so they can try and debug it. I had expected him to
> have ran the binary in a VM. But like you said it might not be
> apparent to the less experienced. 

Where does the ‘him’ come from?  I don't think I've ever implied that
pronoun.

Also, while making a VM, installing some OS, downloading a binary
inside and running it inside, is definitely technically possible, I
consider it time better spent doing other things with a (to me) higher
value / cost (e.g. reviewing a package definition for ld50-silent-
syphoon, investigating actual bugs(*), some infrastructure patches
...).

(*) Only binaries made from within Guix can feasibly be supported by
Guix, though some separate entities aim to support this to some degree.

Greetings,
Maxime.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Haider Mirza]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 204 bytes --]

You're right about the fact that the binary is requesting 
"/lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2"
Is it possible to force the binary to use another interpreter?
If not you can close this down.

Greetings,
Haider.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 221 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Maxime Devos]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 606 bytes --]

Haider Mirza schreef op za 16-04-2022 om 14:58 [+0100]:
> You're right about the fact that the binary is requesting "/lib64/ld-
> linux-x86-64.so.2" Is it possible to force the binary to use another
> interpreter? If not you can close this down.

Yes, here's how to do it on Debian:

$ ~/.guix-profile/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /bin/ls
/bin/ls: error while loading shared libraries: libselinux.so.1: cannot
open shared object file: No such file or directory
[failed!]

Though as can be seen above, not all combinations of interpreters and
binaries actually function ...

Greetings,
Maxime.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 260 bytes --]

bug#54941: No such file or directory when running a binary

[Haider Mirza]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 218 bytes --]


Nevermind, I found the command "patchelf --set-interpreter 
/gnu/store/5h2w4qi9hk1qzzgi1w83220ydslinr4s-glibc-2.33/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 
clangd" to work just fine

Thank you for your help!

Best of luck,
Haider. 

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 248 bytes --]