Your message dated Mon, 6 Jun 2022 12:55:13 +0200
with message-id <a9bbeb49-b3ce-1286-16c3-bd066e1e0...@debian.org>
and subject line Re: Bug#879014: gpgme1.0: FTBFS on some arches: Qt needs a
compile with -fPIC (PIE is not enough), hardening downgrades to PIE
has caused the Debian Bug report #870383,
regarding libdpkg-perl: PIE specs files override previous entries
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 ow...@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)
--
870383: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=870383
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact ow...@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message ---
Source: gpgme1.0
Version: 1.8.0-3
Severity: important
Hi,
gpgme1.0 FTBFS on hurd-i386:
https://buildd.debian.org/status/fetch.php?pkg=gpgme1.0&arch=hurd-i386&ver=1.8.0-3&stamp=1486062988&raw=0
configure:19582: checking whether a simple qt program can be built
configure:19593: g++ -o conftest -g -O2 -fdebug-prefix-map=/<<PKGBUILDDIR>>=.
-specs=/usr/share/dpkg/pie-compile.specs -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat
-Werror=format-security -I/usr/include/i386-gnu/qt5/QtCore
-I/usr/include/i386-gnu/qt5 -fpic -specs=/usr/share/dpkg/pie-link.specs
-Wl,-z,relro -Wl,-z,now conftest.cpp -lQt5Core >&5
In file included from /usr/include/i386-gnu/qt5/QtCore/qcoreapplication.h:43:0,
from /usr/include/i386-gnu/qt5/QtCore/QCoreApplication:1,
from conftest.cpp:32:
/usr/include/i386-gnu/qt5/QtCore/qglobal.h:1113:4: error: #error "You must
build your code with position independent code if Qt was built with
-reduce-relocations. " "Compile your code with -fPIC (-fPIE is not enough)."
# error "You must build your code with position independent code if Qt was
built with -reduce-relocations. "\
Andreas
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
On Thu, 27 Jan 2022 11:05:23 +0100 Gianfranco Costamagna
<locutusofb...@debian.org> wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, 7 Jul 2020 16:02:35 +0200 Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> wrote:
> Control: reopen -1
> Control: tag -1 - patch
>
> On Tue, 2020-07-07 at 07:06:34 +0200, Guillem Jover wrote:
> > On Wed, 2020-07-01 at 17:20:40 -0400, Daniel Kahn Gillmor wrote:
> > > Further conversation about problems compiling and linking against Qt and
> > > GPGME in debian suggest that the problem might be related to dpkg's
> > > default spec files, and confused by Qt's compiler warnings.
> > >
> > > I'm attaching a patch to dpkg which (i think) reflects the fix proposed
> > > by Guillem Jover (in cc):
> >
> > Yes this is what I had locally, thanks for testing! I'm including a
> > fix in the next upload.
>
> > > --- a/data/no-pie-compile.specs
> > > +++ b/data/no-pie-compile.specs
> > > @@ -1,2 +1,2 @@
> > > -*self_spec:
> > > ++self_spec:
> > > + %{!r:%{!fpie:%{!fPIE:%{!fpic:%{!fPIC:%{!fno-pic:-fno-PIE}}}}}}
>
> Ok, so Thorsten Glaser very helpfully pointed out that this is actually
> bogus, as the + is supposed to go with the text not the spec name (which
> was already there!). In this case I assume it gets interpreted as a
> «[SUFFIX]:» entry, and then this get completely ignored (w/o an error
> diagnostic), disabling all the specs files (confirmed by Thorsten on
> x32), that's why the specific problem with gpgme+Qt stopped failing in
> Daniel's tests.
>
> I'll revert this in a quick .5 upload later today, and then try to
> track down what's going on, and add some unit tests for the specs files,
> so that this gets tested on architectures where it truly affects them.
>
After two years, gpgme1.0 now builds fine, so maybe its time to close this bug?
G.
Closing then
G.
> Thanks,
> Guillem
>
>
--- End Message ---
