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.

Description of problem:
binutils has undeclared file conflicts in RHEL-9

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
RHEL-9.2.0-20230115.7
binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.i686
binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.x86_64

Steps to Reproduce:
Try to install the aforementioned packages together

Actual results:
binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.i686.rpm binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.x86_64.rpm
warning: /root/tmp.SUmEXG2DHY/rpms/binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.i686.rpm: Header V3 RSA/SHA256 Signature, key ID fd431d51: NOKEY
file /usr/include/bfd_stdint.h conflicts between attempted installs of binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.i686 and binutils-devel-2.35.2-35.el9.x86_64


Expected result:
No conflicts in case packages that are expected to be installable together , e.g. multilib packages
Declared conflicts where the conflict is expected

Additional information:
This bug was generated by RTT semiautomatic-reporting workflow

  % diff usr-x86_64/include/bfd_stdint.h \
         usr-i686/include/bfd_stdint.h 
1c1
< /* generated for  x86_64-redhat-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.3.1 20221121 (Red Hat 11.3.1-4) */
---
> /* generated for  i686-redhat-linux-gcc (GCC) 11.3.1 20221121 (Red Hat 11.3.1-4) */
  %

*sigh*  Guess I need to remove that comment.

Fixed in binutils-2.35.2-36.el9

CI gating has found a problem with the -36 binutils.  Some of the cross-binutils executables are leaking into the native packages.  I am working on a fix.

Fixed in binutils-2.35.2-37.el9.

Verified with binutils-2.35.2-37.el9.

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 (binutils 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-2023:2548