Description of problem ---------------------- lingot fails to build if "-Werror=format-security" flag is used. ... lingot-gui-mainframe.c:245:8: error: format not a string literal and no format arguments [-Werror=format-security] ... We are working on a proposal to enable "-Werror=format-security" for all packages. Once this flag is enabled, GCC will refuse to compile code that could be vulnerable to a string format security flaw. For more details, please see https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1185 page. To understand why it is important to fix this, please see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Format-Security-FAQ page. How to fix this --------------- The fix for these errors is quite simple. It's a matter of changing a line like, printf(foo); to read, printf("%s", foo); That's it. Please fix this issue in rawhide with a patch (which you should submit to upstream to merge moving forward). Please do a new build with the fix in rawhide. Other releases do not need to be directly fixed, but there should be no harm in pushing out this fix/patch with other needed changes to those branches. In the event you don't fix this bug before the next mass rebuild, provenpackagers may step in and update your package(s) to fix this issue. How reproducible ---------------- Build lingot-0.9.1-6.fc20.src.rpm with "-Werror=format-security" flag to reproduce the problem. To make this process easier, you can use a modified "redhat-rpm-config" package from http://people.fedoraproject.org/~halfie/artifacts/redhat-rpm-config/ URL. $ sha256sum redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0-56.fc20.* faad7594b2080fe76497d0ce50808c905a93dd7b41c1defdde5ca57e3833d3d2 redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0-56.fc20.noarch.rpm 5aa9357174305c7285ffdbc92d7ffe1c07a8a95d5459b930461308f5aad75413 redhat-rpm-config-9.1.0-56.fc20.src.rpm
the code in question got changed in lingot upstream already, version 0.9.2 is about to be released and I plan to update the Fedora package as soon as the new tarball gets released I see no point in patching the obsolete version; generally, I think this change has been planned very poorly, saying "you have to fix it now! as in three weeks your builds will start to fail" without any respect to upstream release cycles, especially when the change is quite questionable[*], seems to me a bit shortsighted, to put it mildly [*] e.g. https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/1185#comment:19
p.s. and of course, I really do not see any security problem related to the reported error in the current version 0.9.1, false positive IMO