Hi, when building libnm for Fedora 31, I noticed a recent increase in size. It also happens locally when I use rpmbuild (or fedpkg local), but see for example the NetworkManager-libnm package on x86_64: [1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1409043 [2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=39267433 [1] was built 3 weeks ago, and [2] is a rebuild of the same package. The size of libnm.so.0.1.0 changes from 2609744 to 4075488. $ ls -la libnm.so.0.1.0* -rwxr-xr-x. 1 thom thom 2609744 Nov 6 20:46 libnm.so.0.1.0-1 -rwxr-xr-x. 1 thom thom 4075488 Nov 24 08:31 libnm.so.0.1.0-2 First I thought it's due to the recent issues with strip from binutils (rhbz#1770464, etc), but that doesn't seem to be the cause. Also, stripping [2] (with a non broken binutils) doesn't make the library any smaller. `readelf --notes --wide libnm.so.0.1.0-1` gives notes from annobin. But for [2] it looks wrong: $ readelf --notes --wide libnm.so.0.1.0-2 | less Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.property Owner Data size Description GNU 0x00000010 NT_GNU_PROPERTY_TYPE_0 Properties: x86 feature: IBT, SHSTK Displaying notes found in: .note.gnu.build-id Owner Data size Description GNU 0x00000014 NT_GNU_BUILD_ID (unique build ID bitstring) Build ID: 05f3e4f91d88d1c79eb8b6c6d797048c6ac0443c Displaying notes found in: .gnu.build.attributes Owner Data size Description (NONE) 0x00000000 Unknown note type: (0x00000000) (NONE) 0x00000000 Unknown note type: (0x00049eda) (NONE) 0x00049eda Unknown note type: (0x00000000) description data: 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 ffffffe0 03 00 00 00 00 00 16 ff> readelf: libnm.so.0.1.0-2: Warning: note with invalid namesz and/or descsz found at offset 0x152870 readelf: libnm.so.0.1.0-2: Warning: type: 0xf, namesize: 0x022a4147, descsize: 0x00000003, alignment: 4 O<89>^D 0x0004894f Unknown note type: (0x00000000) description data: 00 00 00 00 01 01 00 00 47 41 2a 07 02 00 00 00 0a 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 01 01 00 00 47 41 2a 47> I would open a bug against annobin, but both koji builds used the same version 8.78-2.fc31, which makes me think it's something else... Any ideas? best Thomas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
