Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because
the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.
RHEL Engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on RHEL 6 through RHEL 9 to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs in the statuses "NEW", "ASSIGNED", and "POST" are being migrated throughout September 2023. Bugs of Red Hat partners with an assigned Engineering Partner Manager (EPM) are migrated in late September as per pre-agreed dates. Bugs against components "kernel", "kernel-rt", and "kpatch" are only migrated if still in "NEW" or "ASSIGNED". If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "RHEL project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Created attachment 1845466[details]
Proposed patch to redhat-rpm-config
This is a request to apply the uploaded patch to the RHEL-9 redhat-rpm-config package. The patch adds code to select between two versions of the annobin plugin fior gcc and choose the most suitable one.
I am filing this BZ is in response to the recent problems that RHEL-9 builds have been having with annocheck - namely that it is falsely reporting that -fcf-protection and -fstack-clash-protection have not been enabled. This is due to the version of gcc in the RHEL-9 buildroot being newer than the version of annobin.
On its own this patch does not solve the problem. The solution also requires that the gcc package builds its own version of the annobin plugin. A patch to do this has been submitted as a separate BZ.
Originally I had planned to wait until the Fedora rawhide equivalent of these patches had gone in and been tested for a while. But given the RHEL-9 build problems it seems like a good idea to expedite the fix.
I have copied the merge request from rawhide and applied it here.
The rawhide MR is currently blocked as it depends upon a gcc MR being completed.
The rawhide GCC MR is in progress and should be complete soon.
Should be fixed in redhat-rpm-config-193-1.el9
(Sorry about setting the DTM to 26 - I was worried that it might take more time to track down the problem).
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 (new packages: redhat-rpm-config), 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-2022:2544
Created attachment 1845466 [details] Proposed patch to redhat-rpm-config This is a request to apply the uploaded patch to the RHEL-9 redhat-rpm-config package. The patch adds code to select between two versions of the annobin plugin fior gcc and choose the most suitable one. I am filing this BZ is in response to the recent problems that RHEL-9 builds have been having with annocheck - namely that it is falsely reporting that -fcf-protection and -fstack-clash-protection have not been enabled. This is due to the version of gcc in the RHEL-9 buildroot being newer than the version of annobin. On its own this patch does not solve the problem. The solution also requires that the gcc package builds its own version of the annobin plugin. A patch to do this has been submitted as a separate BZ. Originally I had planned to wait until the Fedora rawhide equivalent of these patches had gone in and been tested for a while. But given the RHEL-9 build problems it seems like a good idea to expedite the fix.