V.
Dne 08. 09. 23 v 19:08 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
Hmmm, this is not nice:
~~~
$ sudo dnf4 repoquery -f /usr/bin/checksec
Copr repo for mass-prebuild owned by fberat 3.4 kB/s | 1.8 kB 00:00
Fedora - Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora release
65 kB/s | 9.9 kB 00:00
Fedora - Rawhide - Developmental packages for the next Fedora release
885 kB/s | 6.3 MB 00:07
RCM Tools for Fedora rawhide (RPMs) 60 B/s | 291 B 00:04
Errors during downloading metadata for repository
'rcm-tools-fedora-rpms':
- Status code: 404 for
https://download.devel.redhat.com/rel-eng/RCMTOOLS/latest-RCMTOOLS-2-F-ra...
(IP: 10.0.14.183)
Error: Failed to download metadata for repo 'rcm-tools-fedora-rpms':
Cannot download repomd.xml: Cannot download repodata/repomd.xml: All
mirrors were tried
RPM Fusion for Fedora Rawhide - Free 103 kB/s | 7.5 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora Rawhide - Free 1.3 MB/s | 662 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora Rawhide - Nonfree 96 kB/s | 7.8 kB 00:00
RPM Fusion for Fedora Rawhide - Nonfree 359 kB/s | 265 kB 00:00
Ignoring repositories: rcm-tools-fedora-rpms
checksec-0:2.6.0-4.fc39.noarch
python3-pwntools-0:4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch
~~~
IOW there are two packages providing `/usr/bin/checksec` executable.
Vít
Dne 08. 09. 23 v 18:23 Jun Aruga (he / him) napsal(a):
> Thanks for the info about the Bugzilla ticket.
>
> I think that the situation is a bit different from the things reported
> on the ticket.
> For example, the checksec command is failing in x86_64 build below.
>
>
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910750
>
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/750/105910750/build.log
> + checksec --file=redhat-linux-build/libruby.so.3.2.2
> /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.GFaqBt: line 48: 85686 Aborted (core
> dumped) checksec --file=redhat-linux-build/libruby.so.3.2.2
> RPM build errors:
> error: Bad exit status from /var/tmp/rpm-tmp.GFaqBt (%check)
>
> I tried to check which RPM package version of the checksec is used.
> However it doesn't show the version of the installed checksec. It's
> not convenient. Maybe because it is already installed in the build
> environment? I think we can add the `rpm -q checksec` somewhere for
> debugging purposes in ruby.spec
>
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/750/105910750/root.log
>
> Anyway, I will consider commenting on the ticket.
>
> Jun
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:09 PM Vít Ondruch <vondruch(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>> But reading the ticket, it seems to be related after all :) It seems
>> there was done some change, but properly not tested on Rawhide
>> properly.
>> Feel free to update the ticket.
>>
>>
>> V.
>>
>>
>> Dne 08. 09. 23 v 18:07 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>> Although, the dependency issue is new to me. Chm. Sorry for being to
>>> fast replying without reading carefully.
>>>
>>>
>>> V.
>>>
>>>
>>> Dne 08. 09. 23 v 18:05 Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
>>>>
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> V.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Dne 08. 09. 23 v 17:59 Jun Aruga (he / him) napsal(a):
>>>>> Note that I am trying to fix the FTBFS on the current rpms/ruby
>>>>> rawhide.
>>>>>
>>>>> Below is the scratch build with the modification to print the
output
>>>>> of the checksec command below.
>>>>>
https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
>>>>>
>>>>> ```
>>>>> diff --git a/ruby.spec b/ruby.spec
>>>>> index 51ada32..f61c3fe 100644
>>>>> --- a/ruby.spec
>>>>> +++ b/ruby.spec
>>>>> @@ -855,6 +855,7 @@ rm -rf
>>>>> %{buildroot}%{gem_dir}/gems/rake-%{rake_version}/.github
>>>>> %check
>>>>> %if 0%{?with_hardening_test}
>>>>> # Check Ruby hardening.
>>>>> +checksec --file=%{_vpath_builddir}/libruby.so.%{ruby_version}
>>>>> checksec --file=%{_vpath_builddir}/libruby.so.%{ruby_version} |
\
>>>>> grep "Full RELRO.*Canary found.*NX enabled.*DSO.*No
RPATH.*No
>>>>> RUNPATH.*Yes.*\d*.*\d*.*libruby.so.%{ruby_version}"
>>>>> %endif
>>>>> ```
>>>>>
>>>>> On only s390x build, there is another error in root.log. I am
asking
>>>>> how to fix it on devel@ mailing list now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ```
>>>>> DEBUG util.py:442: No matches found for the following disable
>>>>> plugin
>>>>> patterns: local, spacewalk, versionlock
>>>>> DEBUG util.py:442: Error:-
>>>>> DEBUG util.py:442: Problem: conflicting requests
>>>>> DEBUG util.py:442: - nothing provides nm needed by
>>>>> checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
>>>>> DEBUG util.py:442: - nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn)
>=
>>>>> 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
>>>>> ```
>>>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ruby-sig mailing list -- ruby-sig(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> To unsubscribe send an email to ruby-sig-leave(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>> Fedora Code of Conduct:
>>
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
>> List Guidelines:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
>> List Archives:
>>
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/ruby-sig@lists.fedoraprojec...
>> Do not reply to spam, report it:
>>
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
>