report on the "ELF package notes" status

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi!

I did some quick'n'dirty statistics of how many ELF files successfully gained
a .package.note section.

packages: 28742, see [1] for the list (*)
ELF files: 72464, see [2]
ELF files with .package.note: 47939, see [3]
ELF files without: 24525, see [4]

It turns out that many of those are special files. I filtered
out '\.(mod|o|h|cmxs|go|syso|c32|fas|wcx|wdx|dsx|wlx|wfx|out|dyn.*none)$' (**).
Most of those seem irrelevant, in particular .o hasn't been linked,
so it can't have the notes section…

ELF files after filtering: 15723, see [5]
packages for those filtered files: 4659, see [6]

I did some quick analysis, and the reasons why the notes section is
missing differ:
- 460 packages don't have the .fc36 tag, so they weren't rebuilt
- some packages I checked were built before the mass rebuild and
  got the .fc36 disttag, but failed in the subsequent mass rebuild
- opt-outs:
  895 ghc packages
  210+ ocaml packages
  197 R packages
  30 ruby packages
  61 python packages

That still leaves quite a lot of packages without the notes, but I think
more manual analysis would be necessary to figure out the reasons.

Coverage:
packages: 1 - 4659/28742: 84% (***)
ELF files, excl. irrelevant: 47939 / (47939 + 15723): 75%
ELF files under /usr/lib64/: 1-8114/(8114+30320): 79%
ELF files under /usr/bin/ and /usr/sbin/: 1-5769/(5769+16321): 74%

I think this gives pretty good coverage, esp. for libraries, but
more remains.

[1] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-package-grep-4.txt
[2] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-elf.txt
[3] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-elf-noted.txt
[4] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-elf-unnoted.txt
[5] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-elf-unnoted-filtered.txt
[6] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/f36-elf-unnoted-rpms.txt

(*) Some -data and -langpack- files were excluded to avoid unnecessary downloads.

(**) .h is because I did some earlier grep wrong, so some ELFheader.h
was included in the list :(

(***) an applies-to-orangies comparison, because there are many noarch
packages in the total number.

Zbyszek
_______________________________________________
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
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Users]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux