Bug 2153205
| Summary: | Backport the refcounting feature from 2.58 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Red Hat Enterprise Linux 8 | Reporter: | Dan Horák <dhorak> | ||||
| Component: | glib2 | Assignee: | Michael Catanzaro <mcatanza> | ||||
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Tomas Pelka <tpelka> | ||||
| Severity: | unspecified | Docs Contact: | |||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||
| Version: | 8.7 | CC: | tpelka | ||||
| Target Milestone: | rc | Keywords: | FutureFeature, Reopened, Triaged | ||||
| Target Release: | 8.8 | Flags: | pm-rhel:
mirror+
|
||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||
| Fixed In Version: | glib2-2.56.4-161.el8 | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | ||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||
| Last Closed: | 2023-05-16 09:10:01 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: | |||||||
| Bug Blocks: | 2110312 | ||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||
|
Description
Dan Horák
2022-12-14 09:40:04 UTC
This looks easy enough to backport, so it should be no problem to do that if needed. That said, it would probably be quicker to just patch these directly into your package. Try the attached patch. I haven't tested this yet because I couldn't figure out how to download the srpm you were working with, so it might not build, but it should be pretty close. Created attachment 1932724 [details]
Speculative s390-tools-grefcount.patch for 2.25.0
(In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #2) > This looks easy enough to backport, so it should be no problem to do that if > needed. > > That said, it would probably be quicker to just patch these directly into > your package. Try the attached patch. I haven't tested this yet because I > couldn't figure out how to download the srpm you were working with, so it > might not build, but it should be pretty close. Technically this is very elegant, but I am worried about the legal implications, because you would be adding LGPL code into a MIT licensed project. Thus the backport would be my preferred solution, please. Seems upstream has already solved it via https://github.com/ibm-s390-linux/s390-tools/commit/394a6dd5eacf53633efa2064a307db760902602c, thus closing. Reading https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2110312#c13 it would still make sense to have the refcounts backported, re-opening. OK, sure. Actually it looks like you have an even simpler solution now, https://github.com/ibm-s390-linux/s390-tools/commit/394a6dd5eacf53633efa2064a307db760902602c, so I assume this can be closed? (Feel free to reopen if you still need it, but I think you don't.) Meh, I misread. I see you still want this anyway. (In reply to Michael Catanzaro from comment #10) > Meh, I misread. I see you still want this anyway. yes, please, s390utils developers consider that commit as a short-term workaround. But if we can update glib2 for 8.8, then it won't be needed at the end. for the record - I did a scratch build of unpatched s390utils in https://brewweb.engineering.redhat.com/brew/taskinfo?taskID=50021763 and it confirms that the refcount support is included correctly in glib2-2.56.4-161.el8 (In reply to Dan Horák from comment #14) > for the record - I did a scratch build of unpatched s390utils in > https://brewweb.engineering.redhat.com/brew/taskinfo?taskID=50021763 and it > confirms that the refcount support is included correctly in > glib2-2.56.4-161.el8 Thanks Dane, moving to VERIFIED based on your comment. 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 (glib2 bug fix and enhancement 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/RHBA-2023:3005 |