Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 03/06/2018 05:55 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: Again, IMHO, wiki page should be updated (add something like: -z defs was postponed ... ) and still it should be added a link to buildflags.md . Okay, I made some edits. BTW "%define _strict_symbol_defs_build 1" will enable -z defs ? Yes. Thanks,

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tue, 2018-03-06 at 12:20 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 03/05/2018 05:55 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: > > On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 16:24 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > ### Disable strict symbol checks in the link editor (ld) > > > > > > By default, the link editor will refuse to link shared obje

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 03/05/2018 05:55 PM, Sérgio Basto wrote: On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 16:24 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: ### Disable strict symbol checks in the link editor (ld) By default, the link editor will refuse to link shared objects which contain undefined symbols. In some cases (such as when a DSO is loa

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 16:24 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > ### Disable strict symbol checks in the link editor (ld) > > By default, the link editor will refuse to link shared objects which > contain undefined symbols. In some cases (such as when a DSO is > loaded as a plugin and is expected to bi

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 2018-01-25, Petr Pisar wrote: > On 2018-01-25, Daniel P Berrangé wrote: >> Not neccessarily - with perl, the APIs used by extensions are actually >> in libperl.so, not /usr/bin/perl, and the extensions link to libperl.so >> So perl binary modules ought to still build without undefined symbols

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 2018-01-29 16:51, Richard Shaw wrote: On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Florian Weimer > wrote: I have reverted the -z defs change in rawhide.  A substantial number of underlinked binaries are still shipped in rawhide after this change, either due to expl

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I have reverted the -z defs change in rawhide. A substantial number of > underlinked binaries are still shipped in rawhide after this change, either > due to explicit overrides or incomplete build flags injection. This means > that it is n

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 10:02 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: >> I have reverted the -z defs change in rawhide. A substantial number of >> underlinked binaries are still shipped in rawhide after this change, either >> due to explicit overrides

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I have reverted the -z defs change in rawhide. A substantial number of > underlinked binaries are still shipped in rawhide after this change, either > due to explicit overrides or incomplete build flags injection. This means > that it is ne

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

I have reverted the -z defs change in rawhide. A substantial number of underlinked binaries are still shipped in rawhide after this change, either due to explicit overrides or incomplete build flags injection. This means that it is necessary to review built RPM packages for incorrectly linked

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 04:14:52PM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > There seems to be a similar issue with perl extensions that use C++ failing > to link due to missing libstdc++ symbols, eg: > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24412387 > > I think in that case the issue is that lib

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 07:20 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 01/25/2018 08:50 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: >> It did [1], and I'm fairly certain it was referenced on this thread >> already too. >> >> [1]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS2291#Scope > > That's poorly advertised. I would not ass

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 05:14 PM, Tom Hughes wrote: There seems to be a similar issue with perl extensions that use C++ failing to link due to missing libstdc++ symbols, eg: https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24412387 I think in that case the issue is that libgdal is linked to libstdc

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Fri, Jan 26, 2018 at 08:45:28AM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > %undefine _strict_symbol_defs_build > > I tried this to unbreak the linker, but it completely breaks gcc: > > configure: error: C compiler cannot create

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Fri, 26 Jan 2018 08:45:28 + "Richard W.M. Jones" wrote: > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > %undefine _strict_symbol_defs_build > > I tried this to unbreak the linker, but it completely breaks gcc: > > configure: error: C compiler cannot create e

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > %undefine _strict_symbol_defs_build I tried this to unbreak the linker, but it completely breaks gcc: configure: error: C compiler cannot create executables https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=24460823 Rich.

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25/01/18 15:58, Florian Weimer wrote: On 01/25/2018 04:37 PM, Petr Pisar wrote: On 2018-01-25, Daniel P  Berrangé wrote: Not neccessarily - with perl, the APIs used by extensions are actually in libperl.so, not /usr/bin/perl, and the extensions link to libperl.so So perl binary modules ough

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 04:37 PM, Petr Pisar wrote: On 2018-01-25, Daniel P Berrangé wrote: Not neccessarily - with perl, the APIs used by extensions are actually in libperl.so, not /usr/bin/perl, and the extensions link to libperl.so So perl binary modules ought to still build without undefined symbols

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 04:51 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: On 25 January 2018 at 14:52, Florian Weimer wrote: ../src/fu-device-locker.c:49:1: internal compiler error: in ix86_expand_prologue, at config/i386/i386.c:14572 Yes, this is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1538648 Agreed. I can per

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25 January 2018 at 14:52, Florian Weimer wrote: >> ../src/fu-device-locker.c:49:1: internal compiler error: in >> ix86_expand_prologue, at config/i386/i386.c:14572 > Yes, this is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1538648 Agreed. > I can perhaps put a workaround in redhat-rpm-config

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 14:50 +, Peter Robinson wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Michael Cronenworth > wrote: > > On 01/25/2018 02:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > > > I think the -z defs change should be reverted. It breaks very > > > long- > > > standing expected behaviour o

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 2018-01-25, Daniel P Berrangé wrote: > Not neccessarily - with perl, the APIs used by extensions are actually > in libperl.so, not /usr/bin/perl, and the extensions link to libperl.so > So perl binary modules ought to still build without undefined symbols, > as IIUC they're not relying on thin

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 08:50 AM, Peter Robinson wrote: It did [1], and I'm fairly certain it was referenced on this thread already too. [1]https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/BINUTILS2291#Scope That's poorly advertised. I would not associate a Binutils version update with a LDFLAGS change. The ch

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 04:04 PM, Fabio Valentini wrote: Yes, this is:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1538648 I can perhaps put a workaround in redhat-rpm-config, which should make it much less likely that this compiler bug is encountered. Rebuilding gcc takes 15+ hours, unfortunately, and un

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 3:52 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 01/25/2018 03:45 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: >> >> On 25 January 2018 at 14:28, Richard Hughes wrote: >>> >>> Was there a test mass rebuild? If so, how many packages need fixes? I >>> got bitten by this just now and it would have been nice

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 03:45 PM, Richard Hughes wrote: On 25 January 2018 at 14:28, Richard Hughes wrote: Was there a test mass rebuild? If so, how many packages need fixes? I got bitten by this just now and it would have been nice to fix the problems upstream before Fedora rebuilds just started failing

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 2:21 PM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > On 01/25/2018 02:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >> I think the -z defs change should be reverted. It breaks very long- >> standing expected behaviour of linkers and there's been no proper >> justification for doing it. > > > +1 >

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25 January 2018 at 14:28, Richard Hughes wrote: > Was there a test mass rebuild? If so, how many packages need fixes? I > got bitten by this just now and it would have been nice to fix the > problems upstream before Fedora rebuilds just started failing. Replying to myself, trying to fix it (by

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25 January 2018 at 14:21, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > This should go through a Fedora Change workflow. I am unaware of a Fedora > Change for this. Was there a test mass rebuild? If so, how many packages need fixes? I got bitten by this just now and it would have been nice to fix the problems

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/25/2018 02:41 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: I think the -z defs change should be reverted. It breaks very long- standing expected behaviour of linkers and there's been no proper justification for doing it. +1 This should go through a Fedora Change workflow. I am unaware of a Fedora Chan

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 6:33 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:40:29AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 25/01/18 07:31, Remi Collet wrote: >> > Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : >> > > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared >> > > o

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:40:29AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 25/01/18 07:31, Remi Collet wrote: > > Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : > > > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > > > objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbo

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Dne 25.1.2018 v 09:40 Tom Hughes napsal(a): > On 25/01/18 07:31, Remi Collet wrote: >> Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : >>> I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared >>> objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbol >>> versioning be

Re: koschei interpertation; was: Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 2018-01-23 20:06, R P Herrold wrote: On Tue, 23 Jan 2018, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: What needs to be done for this ? I see my package "libvirt" present in its UI https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/libvirt but it says "Package is currently ineligible for scheduling due t

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25/01/18 09:17, Neal Gompa wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:03:34AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: On 25/01/18 08:41, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote: Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Floria

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 4:13 AM, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:03:34AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: >> On 25/01/18 08:41, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: >> >On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote: >> >>Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : >> >>>I upd

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 09:03:34AM +, Tom Hughes wrote: > On 25/01/18 08:41, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > >On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote: > >>Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : > >>>I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > >

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25/01/18 08:41, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote: Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbol vers

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:31:29AM +0100, Remi Collet wrote: > Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : > > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > > objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbol > > versioning because the are not necessar

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 25/01/18 07:31, Remi Collet wrote: Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol ve

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Le 22/01/2018 à 16:24, Florian Weimer a écrit : > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > objects with undefined symbols.  Such undefined symbols break symbol > versioning because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol > version at run time.  (rhbz#1535422

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Dne 23.1.2018 v 19:03 Daniel P. Berrange napsal(a): > On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 05:56:47PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: >> On 23/01/18 15:38 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >>> We could deactivate -z defs for F28 and reactivate it after the branch >>> for F29, giving packagers more time to fix issues

Re: koschei interpertation; was: Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 02:06:15PM -0500, R P Herrold wrote: > On Tue, 23 Jan 2018, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > > What needs to be done for this ? I see my package "libvirt" present > > in its UI > > > > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/libvirt > > > > but it says > > > > "

koschei interpertation; was: Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tue, 23 Jan 2018, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > What needs to be done for this ? I see my package "libvirt" present > in its UI > > https://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/libvirt > > but it says > > "Package is currently ineligible for scheduling due to following reasons: looking

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 05:56:47PM +, Jonathan Wakely wrote: > On 23/01/18 15:38 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > We could deactivate -z defs for F28 and reactivate it after the branch > > for F29, giving packagers more time to fix issues. > > I think that might be a good idea (given how late

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 23/01/18 15:38 +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: We could deactivate -z defs for F28 and reactivate it after the branch for F29, giving packagers more time to fix issues. I think that might be a good idea (given how late in the F28 process we are) but for many packages it will just mean we have t

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/23/2018 12:26 PM, Mamoru TASAKA wrote: Florian Weimer wrote on 01/23/2018 12:24 AM: In some cases (such as when a DSO is loaded as a plugin and is expected to bind to symbols in the main executable), undefined symbols are expected.  In this case, you can add %undefine _strict_symbol

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 02:04:26PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > On 01/23/2018 01:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > > > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > > > objects > > > with undefined symbo

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/23/2018 01:49 PM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote: On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning because the are not necessarily bo

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects > with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning > because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol version at run > time

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/23/2018 10:25 AM, Fabio Valentini wrote: For the record, my affected packages are (according to koschei, and as of the time of writing this): - gala (internal plugins) - maya-calendar("ceil" reference missing, ppc64 only) So it's a missing -lm on the linker command line. - noise (intern

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Florian Weimer wrote on 01/23/2018 12:24 AM: In some cases (such as when a DSO is loaded as a plugin and is expected to bind to symbols in the main executable), undefined symbols are expected.  In this case, you can add     %undefine _strict_symbol_defs_build to the RPM spec file to disable t

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Tuesday, 23 January 2018 at 11:28, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > Hi, Florian. > > On Monday, 22 January 2018 at 16:24, Florian Weimer wrote: > > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects > > with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On 01/23/2018 11:28 AM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: Hi, Florian. On Monday, 22 January 2018 at 16:24, Florian Weimer wrote: I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning because the a

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

Hi, Florian. On Monday, 22 January 2018 at 16:24, Florian Weimer wrote: > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects > with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning > because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol version at r

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 4:24 PM, Florian Weimer wrote: > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects > with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning > because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol version at run > time. (rhbz

Re: -z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 04:24:31PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared > objects with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol > versioning because the are not necessarily bound to the correct > symbol version at run time

-z defs linker flag activated in Fedora rawhide

I updated redhat-rpm-config to instruct ld to reject linking shared objects with undefined symbols. Such undefined symbols break symbol versioning because the are not necessarily bound to the correct symbol version at run time. (rhbz#1535422) ### Disable strict symbol checks in the link edit