Your message dated Sun, 7 May 2023 16:37:35 +0200
with message-id <[email protected]>
and subject line Re: Bug#1035432: blhc: Warnings for Linux 6.3 build
has caused the Debian Bug report #1035432,
regarding support more than one ignore-line-regexp line
to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact [email protected]
immediately.)
--
1035432: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1035432
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact [email protected] with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Package: blhc
Version: 0.13-5
Severity: normal
X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Hello,
Diederik de Haas prepared importing Linux 6.3 in the Debian kernel
repository. The salsa test pipeline fails with an issue reported by blhc
as can be seen on
https://salsa.debian.org/diederik/linux/-/pipelines/524434/failures
The problem is that some binaries that are only used for testing the
perf binary are (deliberately) compiled with -O0 and so without
-D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2.
Given that the binaries are not included in the resulting packages, IMHO
the best way forward would be to somehow tell blhc that these few builds
are false positives. However I didn't find a way to do that (which might
be related to me not taking much time and only having limited Perl
knowledge).
Do you have a nice idea how to fix the test that does involve neither
disabling the blhc tests nor disabling the perf tests? One idea is to
not check debug builds (-Og or -O0) for the fortify stuff. Another is to
allow specifying a regexp of (possible) false positives.
Best regards
Uwe
-- System Information:
Debian Release: 12.0
APT prefers testing-security
APT policy: (700, 'testing-security'), (700, 'testing-debug'), (700,
'stable-security'), (700, 'stable-debug'), (700, 'testing'), (700, 'stable'),
(600, 'unstable'), (500, 'unstable-debug'), (500, 'stable-updates'), (500,
'oldstable-updates'), (500, 'oldstable-debug'), (500, 'oldstable'), (1,
'experimental')
Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
Foreign Architectures: i386
Kernel: Linux 6.1.0-8-amd64 (SMP w/4 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
Locale: LANG=en_US.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=en_US.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8),
LANGUAGE=en_US:en
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
LSM: AppArmor: enabled
Versions of packages blhc depends on:
ii libdpkg-perl 1.21.21
blhc recommends no packages.
blhc suggests no packages.
-- no debconf information
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On 5/7/23 11:50, Simon Ruderich wrote:
Hi Uwe,
On Sun, May 07, 2023 at 09:17:48AM +0200, Uwe Kleine-König wrote:
The idea is to have several ignore-line-regexp specs, where each is simpler
and can be documented individually. However that doesn't work as blhc only
uses one of them (don't remember, probably the first or the last).
I would consider it a very nice feature of blhc to support using them all.
Now that the original bug is degraded to a RTFM, I made this bug a wishlist
item for this feature.
using multiple "ignore-linx-regexp" is supposed to work (just
checked the source and there's also a test with multiple
ignore-line-regexps).
Could you provide a sample build log where it fails?
Oh great. I researched what made me assume it's broken. And it's a
combination of me fatfingering one regexp and someeone else claiming
several regexps were not supported.
I committed that to the kernel repo now. As of now blhc didn't run yet,
but I assume it will succeed, as it succeeded before in a test branch.
https://salsa.debian.org/kernel-team/linux/-/pipelines/525986
Thanks for your support, closing the bug report
Uwe
--- End Message ---
