Bug#787853: lintian: Do not complain about lack of LFS from local implementations
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 02:14:51PM +0200, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Hi Sebastian,
Hi Niels,
> Thanks for looking into this. :)
>
> I got a few minor comments interleaved below:
np, updated patch attached.
> Thanks,
> ~Niels
Sebastian
>From fb8deee8e2fe3b26f68d137dd6c8bfca50a27fbc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2015 13:06:28 +0200
Subject: [PATCH] binaries: limit LFS symbol checks to unresolved symbols
Guillem reported in BTS [0] that inetutils-ftpd is marked as
binary-file-built-without-LFS-support while it has LFS support. The
false-positive comes from a local symbol.
This patch limits the symbol checks to symbols which are unresolved
(i.e. not local, come from an external library) as suggested by Guillem.
Another (additional) limitation could be to limit the version to ^GLIBC_
as all the symbols for the LFS check come from GLIBC.
With this patch the inetutils-ftpd package is no longer marked with
binary-file-built-without-LFS-support while the havp package is still
marked.
[0] https://bugs.debian.org/787853
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <sebastian@breakpoint.cc>
---
checks/binaries.pm | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/checks/binaries.pm b/checks/binaries.pm
index 4b068dcd5c36..94197b603f29 100644
--- a/checks/binaries.pm
+++ b/checks/binaries.pm
@@ -152,9 +152,10 @@ sub run {
my ($foo, $sec, $sym) = @{$symbol};
unless (defined $has_lfs) {
- if ($LFS_SYMBOLS->known($sym)) {
+ if ($foo eq 'UND' and $LFS_SYMBOLS->known($sym)) {
# Using a 32bit only interface call, some parts of the
- # binary are built without LFS.
+ # binary are built without LFS. If the symbol is defined
+ # within the binary then we ignore it
$has_lfs = 0;
}
}
--
2.1.4
Reply to: