Hide Forgot
Description of problem: Mock 1.1.9 (currently only in EPEL testing) introduces a change in how it handles SELinux inside the chroot: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573111 This makes coreutils fail to build in mock >= 1.1.9: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=573111#c26 (read the "Actual results" section for more details on the failure) The way mock fakes SELinux being disabled might improve in the future, but the way the unit tests check whether SELinux is enabled is still not ideal. Here is the upstreamed patch to fix the issue: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8359 I'm attaching a patch rebased on top of the RHEL6 version. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): coreutils-8.4-9.el6 How reproducible: Always. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Update mock to 1.1.9 from EPEL testing 2. Run: mock -r epel-6-x86_64 --rebuild coreutils-8.4-9.el6.src.rpm Actual results: Build fails because of the following sequence of events: - mock fakes SELinux being disabled by grepping the selinux filesystem out of /proc/filesystems - some unit tests check whether SELinux is enabled by running ls and grepping for context - the files do have an SELinux context (SELinux is enabled on the host) - the unit test fails since SELinux is disabled inside the chroot Expected results: Build succeeds, including unit tests. Additional info: This build failure is happening on all systems that have SELinux enabled when building in mock, including Fedora >= 14. From the changelog in the RHEL package, it seems like you maintain the package in both RHEL and Fedora. Would you like me to also open a bug report for Rawhide or is this one enough to track them all? Note that the Fedora Koji builders have SELinux disabled so you won't be able to reproduce the issue there.
Created attachment 488077 [details] Make coreutils build in mock >= 1.1.9 This a a backported to RHEL6 version of the upstreamed patch: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8359
Thanks for report, alternative workaround is to just skip the check section of the build - as the affected part is in testsuite. As you have already mentioned, this doesn't affect koji and brew builders.
Upstream reviewed my patch and committed a slightly different version: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=8359#16 As such, I'm attaching a backported patch for the latest package in RHEL6.
Created attachment 490189 [details] Backported patch from the one committed upstream
Thanks for the links, I'm aware of it ...
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.
Technical note added. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team. New Contents: Previously, the coreutils packages did not build in Mock because SELinux appeared to be disabled in chroot. This update improves the determination of SELinux. Now, the packages are built correctly in Mock.
Technical note updated. If any revisions are required, please edit the "Technical Notes" field accordingly. All revisions will be proofread by the Engineering Content Services team. Diffed Contents: @@ -1 +1 @@ -Previously, the coreutils packages did not build in Mock because SELinux appeared to be disabled in chroot. This update improves the determination of SELinux. Now, the packages are built correctly in Mock.+Prior to this update, SELinux appeared to be disabled when building coreutils in Mock. As a result, coreutils did not build. With this update, SELinux determines more precisely whether it is disabled or not. Now, the packages are built successfully.
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, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. http://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2011-1693.html