Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

configure: Pass LDFLAGS to link tests #599

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

kraj
Copy link

@kraj kraj commented Mar 9, 2022

LDFLAGS can contain critical flags without which linking wont succeed
therefore ensure that all configure tests involving link time checks are
using LDFLAGS on compiler commandline along with CFLAGS to ensure the
tests perform correctly. Without this some tests may fail resulting in
wrong confgure result, ending in miscompiling the package

Upstream-Status: Pending

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj raj.khem@gmail.com

algitbot pushed a commit to alpinelinux/aports that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2022
algitbot pushed a commit to alpinelinux/aports that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2022
algitbot pushed a commit to alpinelinux/aports that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2022
algitbot pushed a commit to alpinelinux/aports that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2022
algitbot pushed a commit to alpinelinux/aports that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2022
LDFLAGS can contain critical flags without which linking wont succeed
therefore ensure that all configure tests involving link time checks are
using LDFLAGS on compiler commandline along with CFLAGS to ensure the
tests perform correctly. Without this some tests may fail resulting in
wrong confgure result, ending in miscompiling the package

Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
sgunin pushed a commit to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the
  QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in:
  https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a
  is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py

  To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py
  existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status()
  to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like
  patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this
  functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py)

* it finds one "new" issue in oe-core:
  Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch)

* but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this:
  -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]
  +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]

  as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check:

  ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core]

* RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better
  integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating
  .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust
  regexes in patchreview.py.

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin pushed a commit to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the
  QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in:
  https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a
  is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py

  To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py
  existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status()
  to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like
  patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this
  functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py)

* it finds one "new" issue in oe-core:
  Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch)

* but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this:
  -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]
  +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]

  as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check:

  ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core]

* RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better
  integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating
  .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust
  regexes in patchreview.py.

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin pushed a commit to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the
  QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in:
  https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a
  is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py

  To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py
  existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status()
  to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like
  patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this
  functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py)

* it finds one "new" issue in oe-core:
  Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch)

* but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this:
  -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]
  +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]

  as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check:

  ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core]

* RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better
  integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating
  .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust
  regexes in patchreview.py.

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
sgunin pushed a commit to sgunin/oe-openembedded-core-contrib that referenced this pull request Mar 17, 2024
* the idea was to reuse the same function as I've noticed that the
  QA check which was added to insane.bbclass in:
  https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/commit/?id=76a685bfcf927593eac67157762a53259089ea8a
  is in some cases more strcit than scripts/contrib/patchreview.py

  To be honest I wasn't aware of scripts/contrib/patchreview.py
  existence when I've asked about moving check_upstream_status()
  to oe.qa in order to write standalone script just like
  patchreview.py, now I don't feel strongly about sharing this
  functionality (other than adjusting regexes in patchreview.py)

* it finds one "new" issue in oe-core:
  Malformed Upstream-Status 'Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Status: Inappropriate[oe specific]' (meta/recipes-support/libssh2/files/0001-Don-t-let-host-enviroment-to-decide-if-a-test-is-bui.patch)

* but unlike the QA check patchreview.py will report this:
  -Upstream-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]
  +Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599]

  as a missing Upstream-Status instead of malformed as reported by QA check:

  ERROR: zlib-native-1.2.13-r0 do_patch: QA Issue: Malformed Upstream-Status in patch
  /OE/build/oe-core/openembedded-core/meta/recipes-core/zlib/zlib/0001-configure-Pass-LDFLAGS-to-link-tests.patch
  Please correct according to https://www.openembedded.org/wiki/Commit_Patch_Message_Guidelines#Patch_Header_Recommendations:_Upstream-Status :
  Upstream-Broken-Status: Submitted [madler/zlib#599] [patch-status-core]

* RFC: let me know if you think it's worth re-working this to better
  integrate (e.g. detecting Upstream-Broken-Status and not repeating
  .patch path in patchreview.py output) or if I should just adjust
  regexes in patchreview.py.

Signed-off-by: Martin Jansa <Martin.Jansa@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant