I'm not sure whether this is a regression in rpmlint or fedpkg, but "fedpkg lint" now complains that debuginfo packages contain nonstripped ELF files. The message comes from rpmlint: $ rpm -q rpmlint rpmlint-2.2.0-3.fc36.noarch $ rpmlint x86_64/miniz-debuginfo-2.2.0-4.fc37.x86_64.rpm ======================================== rpmlint session starts ======================================= rpmlint: 2.2.0 configuration: /usr/lib/python3.10/site-packages/rpmlint/configdefaults.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/fedora.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/licenses.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/scoring.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/users-groups.toml /etc/xdg/rpmlint/warn-on-functions.toml checks: 32, packages: 1 miniz-debuginfo.x86_64: W: unstripped-binary-or-object /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libminiz.so.0.2-2.2.0-4.fc37.x86_64.debug miniz-debuginfo.x86_64: E: shared-library-without-dependency-information /usr/lib/debug/usr/lib64/libminiz.so.0.2-2.2.0-4.fc37.x86_64.debug miniz-debuginfo.x86_64: W: no-documentation miniz-debuginfo.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/99/4ed2f36d11bc50f1ffd58e90a85a167ba4ee3b ../../../.build-id/99/4ed2f36d11bc50f1ffd58e90a85a167ba4ee3b ========= 1 packages and 0 specfiles checked; 1 errors, 3 warnings, 1 badness; has taken 0.1 s ========
https://github.com/rpm-software-management/rpmlint/issues/780 Just FYI, I have complained about this upstream ^^. Nevertheless, the behavior certainly changed in comparison to rpmlint 1.x for better or worse.
There is written that rpmlint should not be invoked on debuginfo packages. Then it's a regression in fedpkg. fedpkg should not pass the debugging packages to rpmlint. Reassigning to fedpkg (fedpkg-1.42-1.fc36.noarch).
I was told the rpmlint invocation is implement in python3-rpkg-1.64-2.fc36.noarch.
FWIW, I think it would be beneficial all around if rpmlint did the right thing out of the box. E.g. I will often do something 'mock build; rpmlint /var/lib/mock/.../results/*.rpm'. It's not just fedpkg, rpmlint is used in countless other places. It is trivial to detect debuginfo packages: just look at the package name, and treat *-debuginfo and *-debugsource a bit different. Pushing this out to individual consumers will just multiply the work needed to handle this.
... and obviously, once rpmlint becomes a bit smarter and e.g. wants to check -debuginfo packages for something else, it'll need to be called for those packages too. So we'll be undoing the workarounds in the callers to allow that.
If upstream would not agree with what Zbyszek says, maybe we can filter such problematic reports in https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/rpmlint/blob/rawhide/f/fedora.toml -- still one place.
Hi, I understand that rpmlint developers are likely not planning to modify the 'debuginfo' filter. So it is still desired to have it implemented on fedpkg side. Should it be applied to all rpmlint versions? There is already logic in fedpkg, that calls rpmlint-2.0 with different arguments than old rpmlint. And this is related to rpmlint's different arguments too: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2016616
FEDORA-2022-dd5443312c has been submitted as an update to Fedora 38. https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2022-dd5443312c
FEDORA-2022-dd5443312c has been pushed to the Fedora 38 stable repository. If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.
Thanks. I confirm this issue is fixed now.