Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Qiyu Yan]

Sorry my mistake for not using full path, should be fixed now

Jun Aruga (he / him)  于 2023年9月8日周五 下午4:53写道：

> Hi,
> I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
>
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
>
> s390x:
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> DEBUG util.py:442:  No matches found for the following disable plugin
> patterns: local, spacewalk, versionlock
> DEBUG util.py:442:  Error:
> DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
> checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
> DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
>
> [1] https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/ruby
>
> --
> Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
> See  for
> the timezone.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Yaakov Selkowitz]

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 18:50 +0200, Jun Aruga (he / him) wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz 
> wrote:
> > 
> > On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch
> > > right
> > > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x
> > > CPU
> > > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> > > 
> > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> > > 
> > > s390x:
> > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> > [snip[
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides nm needed by
> > > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
> > 
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
> > 
> > AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should
> > be
> > either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> > Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still
> > (hopefully?)
> > safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base
> > buildroot.
> 
> Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
> issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12
> 
> Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand
> it.
> 
> ```
> Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> ```

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_file_and_directory_dependencies

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
Red Hat, Inc.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Jun Aruga (he / him)]

> > Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.
> >
> > ```
> > Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> > ```
>
> RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:. So it's essentially
> looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
> won't find.

OK. I understand it.

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Jun Aruga (he / him)]

> > > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> > > 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
> >
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide
> >
> > Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
> > depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.
>
> Hmm, okay. Do you know how to check which Requires of the ruby.spec
> depending on the python3-unicorn? Maybe using the def repoquery? I
> tried the following command. But maybe it's not correct to find the
> required RPM package to skip in on only s390x in this case.
>
> ```
> $ dnf repoquery \
>   --disablerepo=* \
>   --enablerepo=rawhide \
>   --enablerepo=rawhide-source \
>   --arch=src \
>   --arch=x86_64 \
>   --whatrequires python3-unicorn
> Last metadata expiration check: 0:21:48 ago on Fri 08 Sep 2023 06:25:43 PM 
> CEST.
> unicorn-devel-0:2.0.1.post1-4.fc39.x86_64
> ```

OK. Now I understand why the python3-pwntools package's error was
printed in the root.log of build of the rpms/ruby.

ruby.spec has the following line in it.
```
BuildRequires: %{_bindir}/checksec
```

But both checksec and python3-pwntools RPM packages include the file
`%{_bindir}/checksec` in it. So, the python3-pwntools was taken
unintentionally. Below is the reported ticket for the python3-pwntools
package. Thanks for reporting the issue, Vit.

Please resolve conflict with checksec package
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2238038

-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 08. 09. 23 v 19:02 Stephen Gallagher napsal(a):

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 12:51 PM Jun Aruga (he / him)  wrote:

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:

I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
architecture. Do you know what's wrong?

https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607

s390x:
https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log

[snip[

DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide

AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12

Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.

```
Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
```

RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:.



This is expanded during build, isn't it?


Vít



  So it's essentially
looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
won't find.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Stephen Gallagher]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 12:51 PM Jun Aruga (he / him)  wrote:
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> > > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> > > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> > >
> > > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> > >
> > > s390x:
> > > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> > [snip[
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
> > > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
> >
> > This is a result of
> > https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
> >
> > AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
> > either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> > Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
> > safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.
>
> Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
> issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12
>
> Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.
>
> ```
> Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
> ```

RPM cannot evaluate the %{_bindir} in Requires:. So it's essentially
looking for a virtual provides with those literal characters, which it
won't find.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Jun Aruga (he / him)]

On Fri, Sep 8, 2023 at 6:06 PM Yaakov Selkowitz  wrote:
>
> On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> > I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> > now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> > architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> >
> > https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> >
> > s390x:
> > https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
> [snip[
> > DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides nm needed by
> > checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build
>
> This is a result of
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide
>
> AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
> either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
> Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
> safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

Thanks for your investigation! For the checksec RPM, I reported the
issue to the following bugzilla ticket.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2235760#c12

Why is the following one not a proper solution? I don't understand it.

```
Requires: %{_bindir}/nm
```

> > DEBUG util.py:442:- nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> > 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build
>
> This is a result of
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide
>
> Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
> depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.

Hmm, okay. Do you know how to check which Requires of the ruby.spec
depending on the python3-unicorn? Maybe using the def repoquery? I
tried the following command. But maybe it's not correct to find the
required RPM package to skip in on only s390x in this case.

```
$ dnf repoquery \
  --disablerepo=* \
  --enablerepo=rawhide \
  --enablerepo=rawhide-source \
  --arch=src \
  --arch=x86_64 \
  --whatrequires python3-unicorn
Last metadata expiration check: 0:21:48 ago on Fri 08 Sep 2023 06:25:43 PM CEST.
unicorn-devel-0:2.0.1.post1-4.fc39.x86_64
```

> --
> Yaakov Selkowitz
> Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
> Red Hat, Inc.
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: 
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it: 
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue



-- 
Jun | He - Him | Timezone: UTC+1 or 2, Czech Republic
See  for
the timezone.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: checksec: Problem: conflicting requests in s390x

[Yaakov Selkowitz]

On Fri, 2023-09-08 at 17:53 +0200, Jun Aruga wrote:
> I am running the scratch build for rpms/ruby [1] rawhide branch right
> now, and I see the following error in the root.log on only s390x CPU
> architecture. Do you know what's wrong?
> 
> https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/taskinfo?taskID=105910607
> 
> s390x:
> https://kojipkgs.fedoraproject.org//work/tasks/753/105910753/root.log
[snip[
> DEBUG util.py:442:   Problem: conflicting requests
> DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides nm needed by
> checksec-2.6.0-5.fc40.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/checksec/c/7e260a6c3f4d6f17f02f9c40ff2308919670a50d?branch=rawhide

AFAICS that change is wrong, as nothing provides "nm".  That should be
either Requires: /usr/bin/nm (literally, not %{_bindir}/nm !!) or
Requires: binutils.  Or maybe not at all, if one can still (hopefully?)
safely presume that binutils is a necessary part of the base buildroot.

> DEBUG util.py:442:    - nothing provides python3.12dist(unicorn) >=
> 1.0.2~rc1 needed by python3-pwntools-4.9.0-4.fc39.noarch from build

This is a result of
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/unicorn/c/27cee3896b9c51abe3139222024e0a4def5e30e1?branch=rawhide

Therefore, you cannot require python3-unicorn, or anything that itself
depends on python3-unicorn, until this is fixed.

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
Red Hat, Inc.
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue