Odd error after vsftpd upgrade

[Ben Walton]

On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Boldt, David <dboldt at usgs.gov> wrote:
> Running Solaris 10 on x86.
>
> I've restarted /opt/csw/sbin/vsftpd after the upgrade.
>
> ftp connections produce the following error on "get":
>
> ftp> get sgrtos.flash
> 200 PORT command successful. Consider using PASV.
> 150 Opening BINARY mode data connection for sgrtos.flash (696120 bytes).
> ld.so.1: vsftpd: fatal: libsendfile.so.1: open failed: No such file or
> directory
> ftp>
> ftp> ls
> ld.so.1: vsftpd: fatal: relocation error: file /opt/csw/sbin/vsftpd: symbol
> sendfilev64: referenced symbol not found
> ftp> ls
> 500 OOPS: priv_sock_get_cmd
> No control connection for command: Broken pipe
>
> But the libsendfile lib is there:
>
> % ldd /opt/csw/sbin/vsftpd
>         libwrap.so.1 =>  /opt/csw/lib/i386/libwrap.so.1
>         libnsl.so.1 =>   /lib/libnsl.so.1
>         libpam.so.1 =>   /lib/libpam.so.1
>         libsocket.so.1 =>        /lib/libsocket.so.1
>         librt.so.1 =>    /lib/librt.so.1
>         libsendfile.so.1 =>      /lib/libsendfile.so.1
>         libssl.so.1.0.0 =>       /opt/csw/lib/i386/libssl.so.1.0.0
>         libcrypto.so.1.0.0 =>    /opt/csw/lib/i386/libcrypto.so.1.0.0
>         libc.so.1 =>     /lib/libc.so.1
>         libmp.so.2 =>    /lib/libmp.so.2
>         libmd.so.1 =>    /lib/libmd.so.1
>         libscf.so.1 =>   /lib/libscf.so.1
>         libcmd.so.1 =>   /lib/libcmd.so.1
>         libaio.so.1 =>   /lib/libaio.so.1
>         libdoor.so.1 =>  /lib/libdoor.so.1
>         libuutil.so.1 =>         /lib/libuutil.so.1
>         libgen.so.1 =>   /lib/libgen.so.1
>         libm.so.2 =>     /lib/libm.so.2
>
> % ls -l /lib/libsendfile.so.1
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root bin 9552 Jan  8  2007 /lib/libsendfile.so.1
>
> Have "[ftp] FAIL DOWNLOAD" errors in vsftpd.log, but nothing helpful.
> Nothing in messages log file.
>
> I am very perplexed and grateful for any suggestions.


Can you provide the output of dump -Lv /opt/csw/sbin/vsftpd ?

It looks like there is a 32 vs 64 bit mismatch in expectations here.

Thanks
-Ben