Bug 1683408 - ld is not being set as an alternative, has odd permissions
Summary: ld is not being set as an alternative, has odd permissions
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED EOL
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: binutils
Version: 31
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Nick Clifton
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: 1676291 1683017
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2019-02-26 19:38 UTC by Rob Crittenden
Modified: 2020-11-24 20:21 UTC (History)
12 users (show)

Fixed In Version: binutils-2.32-8.fc31
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-11-24 20:21:23 UTC
Type: Bug
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Rob Crittenden 2019-02-26 19:38:23 UTC
Description of problem:

I'm unable to build an updated mod_nss package in rawhide because gcc is reporting: collect2: fatal error: cannot find 'ld'

I instrumented %configure to look like:

%configure \
    --with-nss-lib=$NSS_LIB_DIR \
    --with-nss-inc=$NSS_INCLUDE_DIR \
    --with-nspr-lib=$NSPR_LIB_DIR \
    --with-nspr-inc=$NSPR_INCLUDE_DIR \
    --with-apr-config --enable-ecc || (ls -l /usr/bin/ld && /usr/sbin/alternatives --list && cat config.log ; exit 1)

The output of that is:

+ ls -l /usr/bin/ld
--w-------. 1 root root 3814880 Feb 26 19:29 /usr/bin/ld
+ /usr/sbin/alternatives --list
libnssckbi.so.x86_64	auto  	/usr/lib64/pkcs11/p11-kit-trust.so
+ cat config.log
...

ld looks very wrong beyond just the perms, AFAIK it should be an alternative.

A scratch build failure showing this is https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=33069378

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

binutils-2.32-7.fc31.x86_64

How reproducible:

Every time.

Comment 1 Stephen Gallagher 2019-02-26 21:01:37 UTC
Shot in the dark, but I'm guessing the recent split of binutils and binutils-gold is at fault here.

Looking at the changes you made, it seems that you moved the `Requires(post): %{_sbindir}/alternatives` to be only in the binutils-gold subpackage. So, depending on transaction order, the alternatives package may not be available when binutils is installed and it will fail to set up the link.

Fixing the Requires(post) will address the issue, I think.

Comment 2 Mamoru TASAKA 2019-02-27 02:20:13 UTC
Requested untag of this build for a moment: https://pagure.io/releng/issue/8172

Comment 3 Nick Clifton 2019-02-27 11:54:50 UTC
(In reply to Stephen Gallagher from comment #1)
> Shot in the dark, but I'm guessing the recent split of binutils and
> binutils-gold is at fault here.

Yes, this is definitely the cause.

> Looking at the changes you made, it seems that you moved the
> `Requires(post): %{_sbindir}/alternatives` to be only in the binutils-gold
> subpackage. So, depending on transaction order, the alternatives package may
> not be available when binutils is installed and it will fail to set up the
> link.
> 
> Fixing the Requires(post) will address the issue, I think.

I think that I will also need to use the alternatives mechanism to install ld.bfd,
even if ld.gold is not being installed.  (Or if it is being installed before or 
after ld.bfd).  I am trying out a local patch, although it is hard to find a simple
way to test this on a local system.

Comment 4 Nick Clifton 2019-02-27 14:46:29 UTC
Sorry about the snafu.

Fixed in: binutils-2.32-8.fc31

Comment 5 Ben Cotton 2019-08-13 17:05:07 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 31 development cycle.
Changing version to '31'.

Comment 6 Ben Cotton 2019-08-13 19:12:59 UTC
This bug appears to have been reported against 'rawhide' during the Fedora 31 development cycle.
Changing version to 31.

Comment 7 Ben Cotton 2020-11-03 15:10:38 UTC
This message is a reminder that Fedora 31 is nearing its end of life.
Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora 31 on 2020-11-24.
It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer
maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a
Fedora 'version' of '31'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 31 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

Comment 8 Ben Cotton 2020-11-24 20:21:23 UTC
Fedora 31 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2020-11-24. Fedora 31 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.