Bug Report: ldd introduces non-deterministic behavior in subsequent piped commands

[Florian Weimer]

* Adhemerval Zanella via Libc-help:

> Although I do not characterize this as a bug, since it represents the
> ELF objects are already being loaded by the kernel, it is already 
> done since d7703d3176d225d5743b21811d888619eba39e82 (to be included
> in 2.36):
>
> $ LD_TRACE_LOADED_OBJECTS=1 ./elf/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /bin/true
>         linux-vdso.so.1 => linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fff4c1d1000)
>         libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f7e75469000)
>         /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => ./elf/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f7e756ba000)
>
> Using LD_TRACE_LOADED_OBJECTS=2 also prints the binary itself:
>
> $ LD_TRACE_LOADED_OBJECTS=2 ./elf/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 /bin/true
>         /bin/true => /bin/true (0x00007f0aebc1c000)
>         linux-vdso.so.1 => linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffc0f9b3000)
>         libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f0aeb9d3000)
>         /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 => ./elf/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007f0aebc24000)
>
> And now that you brought it, I wonder if this would case some disruption.
> I think we might need to filter this out to keep the current lld behavior,
> I am not sure.

Should we always print the soname on the LHS (except maybe when printing
the main executable)?  /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 is a bit of an
outlier because it's not the soname, but its default installation path.

Thanks,
Florian