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

Re: Porter roll call for Debian Stretch

On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 11:26:55AM +0100, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
> Hello,
> > Results are available at
> > https://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2016/08/30/pie-bindnow-20160830/

> > I did a full rebuild with bindnow and PIE enabled, then rebuilt all
> > failed packages with a pristine unstable chroot.

> > You can take a look at
> > https://people.debian.org/~lucas/logs/2016/08/30/pie-bindnow-20160830/diff.txt
> > and grep for "OK Failed" (failed with PIE+bindnow, built fine in
> > unstable). (There are 1188 packages failing to build)

> > Logs for both builds are available in the respective subdirectories.

> Are you sure these are correct? The numbers for PIE+bindnow are a lot
> higher than what we see in Ubuntu, for same unmodified packages.

> E.g. looking at http://qa.ubuntuwire.org/ftbfs/

> amd64/ppc64el/s390x have PIE+bindnow enabled, and
> i386/armhf/arm64/powerpc do not. here is nothing in the thousands
> range. There might be a dozen packages with PIE+bindnow fixes in
> ubuntu, that's not in debian, but that amount cannot be more than a
> dozen or two.

Note that enabling PIE by default is going to cause build failures for a
number of packages which link against static libraries, if those static
libraries have not been rebuilt yet with PIE/PIC.  Ubuntu has worked through
this transition, so a direct comparison would require a rebootstrap test in
Debian instead of just a rebuild test (i.e.: test rebuild packages in
dependency order, and build later packages against the output of the earlier

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: