Bug 1685594
Summary: | libselinux: FTBFS in Fedora rawhide | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Jitka Plesnikova <jplesnik> |
Component: | libselinux | Assignee: | Petr Lautrbach <plautrba> |
Status: | CLOSED RAWHIDE | QA Contact: | Fedora Extras Quality Assurance <extras-qa> |
Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | unspecified | ||
Version: | rawhide | CC: | dwalsh, fweimer, mgrepl, plautrba, vmojzis |
Target Milestone: | --- | ||
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
URL: | http://apps.fedoraproject.org/koschei/package/libselinux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2019-03-18 12:50:48 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: |
Description
Jitka Plesnikova
2019-03-05 15:20:19 UTC
glibc-2.29.9000-1 added gettid system call wrapper (swbz#6399) which is supposed to be in glibc-2.30. I'd use __GLIBC_PREREQ(2,30) but features.h still defines #define __GLIBC__ 2 #define __GLIBC_MINOR__ 29 How can I fix it now? Do I need to wait for glibc-2.30 ? Just call your implementation something else, not gettid. Then you won't need any preprocessor check at all. Does this answer your question? Thanks. I'm not sure. There's an upstrem code: https://github.com/SELinuxProject/selinux/blob/5e33a44c666b966de50121b2e93198d6da65d696/libselinux/src/procattr.c#L25 It works with glibc < 2.29.9000-1. It could work with 2.30 with a correct usage of __GLIBC_PREREQ(2,30). But now we have 2.29 with gettid() wrapper. Do I get it right that you suggest to use something else than gettid() syscall, resp the new gettid() glibc wrapper? There is no reason to call this function in libselinux “gettid”. If you use any other name, the name conflict goes away. Given that the shared library is already built with "gettid@@GLIBC_2.30" could be possibly glibc version updated to something like glibc-2.30-0.X [1] with "__GLIBC_MINOR__ 30"? [1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Versioning/#_prerelease_versions |