> > > > What would help would be if someone could untag that version of binutils so that > > > > it doesn't show up in the buildroots anymore. It's clearly fubar'd. > > > > > > Done. > > > > Hmmmm. Yet my most recent build attempt, just now, failed with a > > linker segfault on all arches: > > > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=1546752 > > > > This is with: > > annobin-9.24.2-fc33 > > binutils-2.35-1.fc33 > > gcc-10.2.1-1.fc33 > > glibc-2.31.9000-21.fc33 > As Kevin mentioned in a followup, he's untagged the 2.35 build so this should be > working again. > > I think I see the root cause in the linker now. It's probably an uncommon > scenario, but I doubt binutils is the only affected package. > > The even better news is I think we can go ahead and green light the mass rebuild > for Monday. Two reasons. One, I expect the preconditions necessary to trip the > bug to be uncommon. Two, I think we can reliably detect a broken binary by the > existence of absolute symbols in the dynamic symbol table. > > The latter in particular means we've got a method where we can find affected > packages while Nick and I iterate on the linker fix. So even if the bug leaks > into packages, we can find them and do targeted rebuilds. For reference I saw an issue yesterday with a build of rpm https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=47871132 _______________________________________________ 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
