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.
Bug 667144 - Source RPM spec file doesn't obey %__cc, %__cpp, %__cxx compiler macros
Summary: Source RPM spec file doesn't obey %__cc, %__cpp, %__cxx compiler macros
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6
Classification: Red Hat
Component: gzip
Version: 6.0
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
low
medium
Target Milestone: rc
: ---
Assignee: Petr Stodulka
QA Contact: qe-baseos-daemons
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-01-04 16:02 UTC by Gordan Bobic
Modified: 2017-12-06 10:49 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-12-06 10:28:13 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Patch to add correct passing of compiler settings specified in the rpm macros (286 bytes, patch)
2011-01-04 16:02 UTC, Gordan Bobic 		no flags Details | Diff
View All

Description Gordan Bobic 2011-01-04 16:02:13 UTC 
Created attachment 471689 [details]
Patch to add correct passing of compiler settings specified in the rpm macros

Description of problem:

The spec file in the source rpm package ignores the compiler rpm macros (or rather, doesn't specify them, so the build defaults to gcc whatever the rpm macros are set to. The macros %__cc, %__cpp, %__cxx, etc. should always be passed to the build process in the appropriate way (environment variables, parameters, whatever) - that's what they are for.

bzip2 spec file, for example, does this correctly, as do a number of other packages, so there is ample precedent for doing this right.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
gzip-1.3.12-18.el6.src.rpm from RHEL6

How reproducible:
Every time.

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Use a different compiler, or build a custom gcc and call the binaries something different, e.g. mygcc
2. Specify it in /usr/lib/rpm/rpmmacros or ~/.rpmmacros
3. rpm -ivh gzip-1.3.12-18.el6.src.rpm; cd ~/rpmbuild/SPECS; rpmbuild -bb gzip.spec
  
Actual results:
gzip builds using gcc regardless of what is specified in the rpm macros.

Expected results:
rpm macros should be obeyed and the specified compiler should be used.

Additional info:
gzip builds and works correctly with Intel ICC / XE compiler (and runs a few percent faster), so as a package, it isn't very GCC specific.

A rather trivial patch to fix this is attached.
Comment 2 RHEL Program Management 2011-01-07 15:37:26 UTC 
This request was evaluated by Red Hat Product Management for
inclusion in the current release of Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
Because the affected component is not scheduled to be updated
in the current release, Red Hat is unfortunately unable to
address this request at this time. Red Hat invites you to
ask your support representative to propose this request, if
appropriate and relevant, in the next release of Red Hat
Enterprise Linux. If you would like it considered as an
exception in the current release, please ask your support
representative.
Comment 5 Jan Kurik 2017-12-06 10:28:13 UTC 
Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6 is in the Production 3 Phase. During the Production 3 Phase, Critical impact Security Advisories (RHSAs) and selected Urgent Priority Bug Fix Advisories (RHBAs) may be released as they become available.

The official life cycle policy can be reviewed here:

http://redhat.com/rhel/lifecycle

This issue does not meet the inclusion criteria for the Production 3 Phase and will be marked as CLOSED/WONTFIX. If this remains a critical requirement, please contact Red Hat Customer Support to request a re-evaluation of the issue, citing a clear business justification. Note that a strong business justification will be required for re-evaluation. Red Hat Customer Support can be contacted via the Red Hat Customer Portal at the following URL:

https://access.redhat.com/
Comment 6 Gordan Bobic 2017-12-06 10:44:41 UTC 
Great job. Sit on a bug with patch supplied to resolve it for just under 6 years until the release goes phase 3. How am I supposed to recommend RHEL to my customers with that level of commitment?
Comment 7 Petr Stodulka 2017-12-06 10:49:53 UTC 
I understand that acrimony, but the bug haven't got ever all 3acks to be applied in RHEL. The patch was applied at least in Fedora because of this bug, if I remember it well.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.