Re: -z defs ld flag breaks gnome-settings-daemon
FYI, I've updated bug #537572 about gnome-settings-daemon eating CPU
I've also open bug report #620874 against ld about -z defs flag
producing a broken gnome-settings-daemon binary
2011/3/15 Alan Devine <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> Just a note to say good work, this has been bugging me for quite a while
> I think its worth doing a bug report against LD -and- notifying the Gnome
> Daemon maintainer, they presumably will make their own assessment on the
> correct "fix" anyhow.
> On 14/03/2011 20:56, Émeric Maschino wrote:
>> I spent my whole week-end performing regression tests to find out what
>> was preventing the GNOME settings daemon from working properly on the
>> IA-64 platform (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=537572).
>> It's noteworthy that this problem is still present in current Debian
>> To summarize testing, the problem wasn't due to a code change in the
>> GNOME settings daemon itself, but to the -z defs flag passed to ld by
>> the debian/rules script of the gnome-settings-daemon source package.
>> Starting with gnome-settings-daemon-2.24.1-1, the following line was
>> added in the debian/rules script:
>> LDFLAGS += -Wl,-O1 -Wl,-z,defs -Wl,--warn-unresolved-symbols
>> Simply removing -Wl,-z,defs from the debian/rules script of the
>> current gnome-settings-daemon-2.30.2-2 produces a working binary: no
>> more CPU eating and everything related to GNOME settings is working
>> properly back again :-)
>> > From what I can read in the ld manpage, the -z defs flag is related to
>> undefined symbols. But my knowledge is too limited to understand
>> further. Does this mean that, with this -z defs passed to ld,
>> undefined symbols are removed from the gnome-settings-daemon binary,
>> breaking something with communicating shared libraries looking for the
>> removed symbols?
>> Now, questions are:
>> - should I file a bug report against ld (in short, are all packages
>> built with -z defs flag broken, revealing something bad with ld, maybe
>> limited to the IA-64 platform only)?
>> - should I send a patch to the gnome-settings-daemon package
>> maintainer(s) in order to remove the offending flag from the
>> debian/rules script? I imagine that all architectures will
>> unfortunately be impacted by this change, so probably not the right
>> way to fix it
>> - BTW, is this issue specific to IA-64 and does it reveal something
>> more serious and not limited to the GNOME settings daemon?
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-ia64-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
> Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4D7F5051.email@example.com