** Changed in: dpkg (Ubuntu Noble)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Zixing Liu (liushuyu-011)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2082636
Title:
[SRU] dpkg: backport frame-pointer enabling m
Verification done, see
https://launchpadlibrarian.net/77680/buildlog_ubuntu-noble-
amd64.rust-ripgrep_14.1.0-1_BUILDING.txt.gz
** Tags removed: verification-needed verification-needed-noble
** Tags added: verification-done verification-done-noble
--
You received this bug notification because
Hello Zixing, or anyone else affected,
Accepted dpkg into noble-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dpkg/1.22.6ubuntu6.2
in a few hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://wiki.ub
> ok, so it sounds like there are some known possibilities of regression
here but that they are low impact and we're willing to accept those
regressions as a trade-off.
Yes. Fixing the issue presents way more risks (e.g., breaking LLVM
entirely, as we don't run tests for LLVM).
--
You received t
ok, so it sounds like there are some known possibilities of regression
here but that they are low impact and we're willing to accept those
regressions as a trade-off.
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchp
> Ok.
> rustc in noble is 1.75, so is affected.
> And it's build with llvm 17, which is also affected.
> what is the impact of llvm not producing proper backchain-saving
logic?
The IBM Z system is funny because the backchain is inside the stack
parameter region (reference:
https://github.com/IB
> This is now cleared up in the updated description (LLVM <= 17 and Rust
<= 1.80, where the upstream patches landed).
Ok.
rustc in noble is 1.75, so is affected.
And it's build with llvm 17, which is also affected.
what is the impact of llvm not producing proper backchain-saving logic?
--
Yo
> Which older rust, llvm versions does the "where problems could occur"
apply to? Are the versions in noble known to be affected?
This is now cleared up in the updated description (LLVM <= 17 and Rust
<= 1.80, where the upstream patches landed).
** Description changed:
[ Impact ]
* On No
Which older rust, llvm versions does the "where problems could occur"
apply to? Are the versions in noble known to be affected?
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/2082636
Title:
[SRU] dpk
I have attached a script to detect if frame pointers have been enabled
for the binary.
If one or two symbols are not enabled, that's fine, and that might be a
false-positive due to the script not handling some complicated DWARF
operations (DWARF is a Turing-complete descriptor language).
** Attac
> * Since LLVM could inline and choose to optimize frame pointers away
in some cases, you will need to check the disassembly of the program
around the function prologue to see if the frame pointer register is
correctly saved to stack (rbp/ebp on x86 architecture).
This is incomplete as an SRU test
** Description changed:
[ Impact ]
- * On Noble, dpkg scripts could not produce Rust binaries with frame-
+ * On Noble, dpkg scripts could not produce Rust binaries with frame-
pointer enabled.
[ Test Plan ]
- * Randomly build a Rust binary package like ripgrep and you will not
-
12 matches
Mail list logo
