| Summary: | Possible regression in binutils-2.26-16.fc25 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Orion Poplawski <orion> |
| Component: | binutils | Assignee: | Nick Clifton <nickc> |
| Status: | CLOSED EOL | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | unspecified | ||
| Version: | 25 | CC: | jakub, nickc |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2017-12-12 10:55:02 UTC | Type: | Bug |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
|
Description
Orion Poplawski
2016-03-21 02:33:51 UTC
Hi Orion, > Since binutils (and pkgconfig/kernel-headers) update I'm seeing an openmpi > hdf5 test hang: > Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): > binutils-2.26-16.fc25 Does this mean that it used to work with an older version of the 2.26 based rawhide binutils (eg: binutils-2.26.12) or that it used to work with an older version of the base binutils (eg: binutils-2.25.1-9) ? (I am hoping the former as that will make it easier to bisect the change the binutils that might have caused the problem...) Cheers Nick I believe it was working with 2.26-14.fc25. There may be some weird openmpi interactions here too at the tests are running as check where the program doesn't call MPI_Finalize, or something similar. I can get t_pflush1 to complete if I change it up to call MPI_Finalize(), but apparently that defeats the purpose of the test. Well the good news is that there are only two changes in the binutils between 2.26-14.fc25 and 2.26-16.fc25 (duh). The first makes a common symbol in an executable override the definition of a non-common version of the same symbol defined in a shared library. The second fixes a bug in the generation of relocations generated for the x86 architectures (only, not any other architecture) when sources are compiled with -fPIE. Does either of these sceanarios ring a bell ? Not knowing anything about hdf5 package or the openmpi tests my guess would be that the problem is related to the former - ie a common symbol in an executable overriding one defined in a shared library. if so perhaps you could try rebuilding with -fno-common and see if that acts as a workaround. This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 25 development cycle. Changing version to '25'. This message is a reminder that Fedora 25 is nearing its end of life. Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 25. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora 'version' of '25'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' to a later Fedora version. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora 25 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora, you are encouraged change the 'version' to a later Fedora version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above. Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes bugs or makes them obsolete. Fedora 25 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2017-12-12. Fedora 25 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this bug. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed. |