From: "woodard at redhat dot com" <sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org>
To: libabigail@sourceware.org
Subject: [Bug default/29673] qt6-qtbase from f37 fails fedabipkgdiff --self-compare
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2023 20:08:12 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <bug-29673-9487-wwsV5pbwSF@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <bug-29673-9487@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/>
https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=29673
--- Comment #10 from Ben Woodard <woodard at redhat dot com> ---
This is a hard judgement call. There may be multiple different problems
mentioned in this bug. With the current codebase as of:
commit 7952a748de3578964b2c6b8d3bb94e0bbcfb653e (HEAD -> master, origin/master,
origin/HEAD)
Author: Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>
Date: Mon Mar 27 00:10:21 2023 +0200
Bug 29345 - abipkgdiff is confused by symlinked binaries in RPMs
<snip>
Signed-off-by: Dodji Seketeli <dodji@redhat.com>
There seems to be some daylight between this bug and a large number of the
others:
Comparing the ABI of binaries between qt6-qtbase-6.4.2-5.fc37.aarch64.rpm and
qt6-qtbase-6.4.2-5.fc37.aarch64.rpm:
==== SELF CHECK SUCCEEDED for 'libQt6Core.so.6.4.2' ====
======== comparing'libQt6Network.so.6.4.2' to itself wrongly yielded result:
===========
Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added function
Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 1 Changed (1 filtered out), 0 Added
variables
1 Changed variable:
[C] 'QString activeBackendName' was changed to 'static QString
QSslSocketPrivate::activeBackendName' at qsslsocket_p.h:161:1:
declaration name changed from 'activeBackendName' to
'QSslSocketPrivate::activeBackendName'
===SELF CHECK FAILED for 'libQt6Network.so.6.4.2'
While the following package seem to exhibit this same unspecified problem:
bpftrace btrfs-progs enlightenment getdns groonga-libs mono-complete mono-core
mono-data mono-devel mono-extras mono-mvc mono-reactive mono-wcf mono-web
mono-winforms mono-winfx nest-mpich nest-openmpi nest openldap-servers pocl
qt6-qtbase ruby-libs xorg-x11-server-Xdmx
That looks like:
Comparing the ABI of binaries between getdns-1.7.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm and
getdns-1.7.3-1.fc37.x86_64.rpm:
======== comparing'libgetdns.so.10.2.0' to itself wrongly yielded result:
===========
Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed (5 filtered out), 0 Added
functions
Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added variable
===SELF CHECK FAILED for 'libgetdns.so.10.2.0'
The morphology being that there are filtered changes but what those changes are
is not enumerated in the way that qt6-qtbase's change is. This leads me to
suspect that they are different problems. I will be happy to split up the
issues if that would be helpful.
Glibc also has a very similar problem to all the others listed above but it
only seems to appear on ppc64le and s390x:
Comparing the ABI of binaries between glibc-2.36-9.fc37.ppc64le.rpm and
glibc-2.36-9.fc37.ppc64le.rpm:
======== comparing'libc.so.6' to itself wrongly yielded result: ===========
Functions changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed (2 filtered out), 0 Added
functions
Variables changes summary: 0 Removed, 0 Changed, 0 Added variable
===SELF CHECK FAILED for 'libc.so.6'
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-27 20:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-11 22:26 [Bug default/29673] New: " woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-11 22:27 ` [Bug default/29673] " woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 17:02 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 17:14 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 17:23 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 17:28 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 17:33 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-10-14 18:32 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2022-12-16 21:58 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2023-01-07 3:08 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2023-03-23 22:01 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2023-03-27 20:08 ` woodard at redhat dot com [this message]
2023-05-18 20:23 ` woodard at redhat dot com
2023-05-18 22:17 ` woodard at redhat dot com
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=bug-29673-9487-wwsV5pbwSF@http.sourceware.org/bugzilla/ \
--to=sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org \
--cc=libabigail@sourceware.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).