Sorry for the late response, I've missed your mail. Op zondag 26-04-2009 om 13:41 uur [tijdzone -0700], schreef Roland McGrath: > We should figure out why they are different. (Off hand I don't think this > issue should have changed in the build tools since F10.) > > Can you give me two binaries they you think ought to be identical, but > which had different build IDs generated? Offcourse. I've placed a .tgz file here: http://menora.cnoc.nl/extern/DifferentBuildIDsExample.tgz It contains the source of a hello-world application. (hello.pp) And two binaries (hello and hello1) which differ but were build from the same source. There's also a link-script (link.res) and a shell-script (ppas.sh) which you can use to link the executables yourself. The necessary object files are also there. > I want to get to the bottom of the problem before you change anything. > > But I'll note that if you were to use --build-id=none then you'd have your > rpm build break in the find-debuginfo.sh stage because of missing a build ID. I know. > However, --build-id=0x00000000000000000000 (or any 20 hex digits you choose) > will hard-code that bogus build-ID during your link stages. That will make > your comparisons fine if your binaries are really identical. Then, the > find-debuginfo.sh stage will regenerate the build IDs after it edits the > source file names in the DWARF information. That's a nice trick. I could use that as a last resort. > But let's find the real source of the problem and fix it rather than > working around it. Thanks for the help, Joost. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
