[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: hppa-firmware.img missing build-id
|
From: |
Daniel P . Berrangé |
|
Subject: |
Re: hppa-firmware.img missing build-id |
|
Date: |
Tue, 23 Apr 2024 16:10:24 +0100 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/2.2.12 (2023-09-09) |
On Tue, Apr 23, 2024 at 05:07:17PM +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
> On 4/23/24 16:58, Cole Robinson wrote:
> > On 4/23/24 10:11 AM, Cole Robinson wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > hppa-firmware.img and hppa-firmware64.img in qemu.git are missing ELF
> > > build-id annotations. rpm builds on Fedora will error if an ELF binary
> > > doesn't have build-id:
> > >
> > > RPM build errors:
> > > Missing build-id in
> > > /tmp/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/qemu-9.0.0-1.rc2.fc41.x86_64/usr/share/qemu/hppa-firmware.img
> > > Missing build-id in
> > > /tmp/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/qemu-9.0.0-1.rc2.fc41.x86_64/usr/share/qemu/hppa-firmware64.img
> > > Generating build-id links failed
> > >
> > > I didn't hit this with qemu 8.2.* builds FWIW
> > >
> >
> > Though checking older bundled hppa-firmware binaries with `readelf` I
> > don't see build-id either, so now I'm not sure why those RPM builds were
> > passing.
> >
> > FWIW the RPM check is deep in RPM code:
> > https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpm/blob/68d0f3119c3d46b6184f4704edb51749ce9f819e/build/files.c#L1976
> >
> > Maybe something else in hppa-firmware ELF headers caused this check to
> > be skipped in the past
>
> Maybe Fedora ignores binaries which don't have the executable flag set?
Yes, that's probably it. qemu 9.0.0 has +x set on the hppa-firmware
images, while qemu 8.2.0 does not have +x set.
With regards,
Daniel
--
|: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :|
|: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|