Note: This is a public test instance of Red Hat Bugzilla. The data contained within is a snapshot of the live data so any changes you make will not be reflected in the production Bugzilla. Email is disabled so feel free to test any aspect of the site that you want. File any problems you find or give feedback at bugzilla.redhat.com.
Bug 669477 - libtalloc 2.0.5-6 binaries not stripped, empty -debuginfo
Summary: libtalloc 2.0.5-6 binaries not stripped, empty -debuginfo
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Fedora
Classification: Fedora
Component: libtalloc
Version: rawhide
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Simo Sorce
QA Contact: Fedora Extras Quality Assurance
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks: DebugInfo
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2011-01-13 18:53 UTC by Ville Skyttä
Modified: 2011-09-16 13:28 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version: libtalloc-2.0.5-7.fc15
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2011-09-16 13:28:19 UTC
Type: ---
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Let rpmbuild strip binaries, make build more verbose. (deleted)
2011-01-13 18:53 UTC, Ville Skyttä
no flags Details | Diff

Description Ville Skyttä 2011-01-13 18:53:58 UTC
Created attachment 473389 [details]
Let rpmbuild strip binaries, make build more verbose.

libtalloc 2.0.5-6 installs *.so.* as non-executable, which means rpmbuild will not strip them.  Fix attached, along with a change that makes the used CFLAGS visible in the build log.

Comment 3 Stephen Gallagher 2011-01-14 12:54:08 UTC
Thanks for your help with this. I wasn't sure what was causing that to happen.

I will apply this fix to libtdb and libtevent as well, which are also suffering this issue, and I've reported https://bugzilla.samba.org/show_bug.cgi?id=7905 upstream to Samba to fix the build system so it generates the libraries correctly.

Comment 4 Ville Skyttä 2011-01-14 16:51:23 UTC
"Correctly" might be a bit strong word to use when communicating with upstream - unless I'm mistaken, there's no actual need for shared objects to be executable in Linux.  The executability requirement is just a quirk in rpmbuild's debuginfo extractor (and I believe also some other things in rpmbuild that deal with shared objects).


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.