Bug 1946518

This is a known bug in the 2.30-98.el8 binutils.  Fortunately it has been fixed in the 2.30-99.el8 binutils, which is now in the buildroot for RHEL 8.

I agree but I opened this bug against CentOS Stream where this bug still exists.

I wonder what's the correct way to track bugs in CentOS Stream - my gut feeling is that CLOSED status isn't appropriate when the bug is still present.

Hi Ondřej,

  Sorry about closing this BZ - I looked at the Product field and skipped the Version field in the header...

  I am unfamiliar with how the RHEL-8 version of CentOS Stream gets its sources.  Does it inherit from the RHEL-8.5.0 branches ?  If so, then presumably the fact that the binutils there has been updated means that the centos version will be updated soon.

  I did try to clone the centos binutils to see if I could trigger a rebuild but unforunatly it appears that I do not have permission to access these sources.  (Which is strange given that I can clone other centos packages).

  I will leave this BZ in ASSIGNED for now.   Please can you let me know if binutils in CentOS Stream does get updated to 2.30-99.el8 ?

Cheers
  Nick

Yes, currently CS8 is getting RHEL-8.5.0 content.  binutils-2.30-99.el8 has already been built in the CentOS koji [0], and is included in the next compose, which I'm hoping to push out today.

[0] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=17192

(In reply to Carl George 🤠 from comment #4)
> Yes, currently CS8 is getting RHEL-8.5.0 content.  binutils-2.30-99.el8 has
> already been built in the CentOS koji [0], and is included in the next
> compose, which I'm hoping to push out today.
> 
> [0] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=17192

Binutil is fixed now - thank you. But binutil-devel is still the old version, and I do not know whether it's safe to mix them - and binutil-devel is needed to build / change kernel drivers...
[root@node2222 pi]# yum update
Last metadata expiration check: 0:00:05 ago on Wed 07 Apr 2021 03:35:16 AM UTC.
Error: 
 Problem: package binutils-devel-2.30-98.el8.aarch64 requires binutils = 2.30-98.el8, but none of the providers can be installed
  - cannot install both binutils-2.30-99.el8.aarch64 and binutils-2.30-98.el8.aarch64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package binutils-devel-2.30-98.el8.aarch64
  - cannot install the best update candidate for package binutils-2.30-98.el8.aarch64
(try to add '--allowerasing' to command line to replace conflicting packages or '--skip-broken' to skip uninstallable packages or '--nobest' to use not only best candidate packages)

(In reply to MauriceS from comment #5)

Hi Maurice,

> But binutil-devel is still the old
> version, and I do not know whether it's safe to mix them - and binutil-devel
> is needed to build / change kernel drivers...

If you can update to 2.30-99 then I would definitely recommend it.  The 2.30-98
version is broken when it comes to AArch64 code generation.

That said, it would not be wise to update binutils without updating binutils-devel at the same time.  The two packages do need to be in sync.

Cheers
  Nick

CentOS Stream now ships both binutils-2.30-99 and binutils-devel-2.30-99, thanks for the quick fix, Carl!

I don't think -99 is good either.  The binaries don't crash immediately,
but anything using threads will crash eventually.  See
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1946977

(In reply to Richard W.M. Jones from comment #9)
> I don't think -99 is good either.  The binaries don't crash immediately,
> but anything using threads will crash eventually.

Sadly this is true. :-(  

[Resetting this BZ to ASSIGNED]

I have a fix which should resolve the issue, but I have to wait for an ITM to be set on BZ 1946977 before I can push the patch.

Now fixed in binutils-2.30-100.el8

Any eta when this will be available in Centos Stream?

(In reply to MauriceS from comment #14)
> Any eta when this will be available in Centos Stream?

Not sure.  (I assume that you are referring to CentOS 8 and not CentOS 9).  The -101 build has just completed gating and been tagged into the rhel-8 buildroot, so I would assume that if the automatic synchronization is working, then an update should be happening at any moment.

Cheers
  Nick

PS.  The -101 build is the same as the -100 build, just with an extra CVE fix added.

binutils-2.30-101.el8 was built for CentOS Stream 8 on 2021-04-17 [0], composed on 2021-04-21 [1], and published to the mirrors shortly after that.

[0] https://koji.mbox.centos.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=17267
[1] https://composes.centos.org/CentOS-Stream-8-20210421.n.0/compose/BaseOS/x86_64/os/Packages/binutils-2.30-101.el8.x86_64.rpm

Verified with both CentOS 8 binutils-2.30-101.el8.aarch64 and RHEL 8.5.0 binutils-2.30-101.el8.aarch64.

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory (Moderate: binutils security update), and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2021:4364