Bug 1548418
Summary: | evince: Partial build flags injection | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Florian Weimer <fweimer> |
Component: | evince | Assignee: | Stephan Bergmann <sbergman> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | alexl, caolanm, feborges, fweimer, john.j5live, mclasen, mkasik, rhughes, rstrode, sandmann |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | evince-3.26.0-6.fc28 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2018-02-27 08:21:13 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: | |
Embargoed: | |||
Bug Depends On: | 1548397 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 1539083 |
Description
Florian Weimer
2018-02-23 12:59:16 UTC
caolanm->sberg: can you have a look to see what (presumably) autotools nightmare causes this seeing as we don't do anything special in the spec My understanding from <https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/thread/SIQO4XVST6GHXALMAVUI6FLZJVSTXF2O/> "Change to linker flags injection (#1548397)" is that this will be fixed once evince is rebuilt against the fixed redhat-rpm-config-102-1.fc28 from bug 1548397. (Without checking it further, I assume that the -z now from the -specs=... argument is is the only missing part of LDFLAGS injection.) Yes, this is one of the cases which might be simply fixed by recompilation with the new way of injection -Wl,-z,now. The presence of “-Wl,-z -Wl,relro” is very suggestive that LDFLAGS are not completely ignored. If you create a new (non-scratch) build for Fedora 28, I can put it through the analysis process. Florian, can you check whether evince-3.26.0-6.fc28 is OK? (In reply to Stephan Bergmann from comment #4) > Florian, can you check whether evince-3.26.0-6.fc28 is OK? Yes, this version looks good. Thanks. |