Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Kevin Kofler via devel: > Florian Weimer wrote: >> This is currently not a major consideration for system call design. We >> can't add this downstream from the kernel if support just isn't there. >> You have to solve these issues for porting to other architectures >> anyway. > > So the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > This is currently not a major consideration for system call design. We > can't add this downstream from the kernel if support just isn't there. > You have to solve these issues for porting to other architectures > anyway. So the upstream Linux kernel does not care about

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Kevin Kofler via devel: > But the thing is, fstatat is not really a newer version of fstat, it > unfortunately has very different security properties. fstat allows > retrieving the stat metadata only of already open files (if you know or > guess the fd). On the other hand, fstatat allows

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > But the thing is, fstatat is not really a newer version of fstat, it > unfortunately has very different security properties. fstat allows > retrieving the stat metadata only of already open files (if you know or > guess the fd). On the other hand, fstatat allows

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > The fstat/fstat64 system call does not exist on arc and riscv/rv32. > glibc tries to consolidate the implementations as far as possible, so if > the kernel deprecates a system call and the replacement is already > supported by all architectures, glibc uses that, rather than

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Kevin Kofler via devel: > Unfortunately, the fix is more complicated than that. It is really not > helpful behavior from glibc to use the fstatat syscall to implement fstat. > (What is the benefit of doing that?) The fstat/fstat64 system call does not exist on arc and riscv/rv32. glibc tries

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > I suspect some of the preprocessor conditionals in > SyscallSets::IsFileSystem in > > > > need fixing. Unfortunately, the fix is more complicated

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway wrote: > https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1164975 > > Please add in this info, it was on my TODO list, but clearly hasn't > happened yet. https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1164975#c8 Kevin Kofler

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1164975 Please add in this info, it was on my TODO list, but clearly hasn't happened yet. ~spot On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 8:33 AM Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski < domi...@greysector.net> wrote: > On Wednesday, 13 January 2021 at 03:14, Kevin

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Wednesday, 13 January 2021 at 03:14, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Florian Weimer wrote: > > Right, and the glibc 2.33 versions all call fstatat64 in the end (system > > call number 0x106). > > That would be: > > #if !defined(__NR_newfstatat) > #define __NR_newfstatat 262 > #endif > >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > Right, and the glibc 2.33 versions all call fstatat64 in the end (system > call number 0x106). That would be: #if !defined(__NR_newfstatat) #define __NR_newfstatat 262 #endif from:

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Kevin Kofler via devel: > Florian Weimer wrote: >> It's not. It may be a completely different system call. > > So now I had a new idea how to figure out what difference the version of > glibc we are compiling against can make: track down the symbol version: > nm -D --with-symbol-versions

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > So now I had a new idea how to figure out what difference the version of > glibc we are compiling against can make: track down the symbol version: > nm -D --with-symbol-versions Downloads/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.2 | > grep '@GLIBC_2\.33' > U

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > It's not. It may be a completely different system call. So now I had a new idea how to figure out what difference the version of glibc we are compiling against can make: track down the symbol version: nm -D --with-symbol-versions Downloads/libQt5WebEngineCore.so.5.15.2 |

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Florian Weimer wrote: > It's not. It may be a completely different system call. > > Is there a way to get logging of filtered system calls from the sandbox? What I'd suggest doing is strace-ing the rendering process in the version built against glibc 2.32 vs. the version built against glibc

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Tom Callaway: > Based on my (admittedly extremely limited) understanding of things, this > seems correct as > is: > > #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) > case __NR_newfstatat: // fstatat(). EPERM not a valid errno. > #elif defined(__i386__) || defined(__arm__) || \ >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Based on my (admittedly extremely limited) understanding of things, this seems correct as is: #if defined(__x86_64__) || defined(__aarch64__) case __NR_newfstatat: // fstatat(). EPERM not a valid errno. #elif defined(__i386__) || defined(__arm__) || \ (defined(ARCH_CPU_MIPS_FAMILY) &&

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Tom Callaway: > Looks like this might be it. Running with --no-sandbox brings back the > strings. Is there a reference to how the stat calls should now be > done? I suspect some of the preprocessor conditionals in SyscallSets::IsFileSystem in

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Looks like this might be it. Running with --no-sandbox brings back the strings. Is there a reference to how the stat calls should now be done? Thanks, ~spot On Fri, Jan 8, 2021 at 8:58 AM Florian Weimer wrote: > * Tom Callaway: > > > This makes me very suspicious of something in glibc between

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Daniel P. Berrangé: > On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 02:58:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: >> * Tom Callaway: >> >> > This makes me very suspicious of something in glibc between 2.32 >> > (Fedora 33) and 2.32.9000 (rawhide), but I'm not sure where to look >> > from here. Any ideas? >> >> Does the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Fri, Jan 08, 2021 at 02:58:02PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote: > * Tom Callaway: > > > This makes me very suspicious of something in glibc between 2.32 > > (Fedora 33) and 2.32.9000 (rawhide), but I'm not sure where to look > > from here. Any ideas? > > Does the issue go away if you disable the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

* Tom Callaway: > This makes me very suspicious of something in glibc between 2.32 > (Fedora 33) and 2.32.9000 (rawhide), but I'm not sure where to look > from here. Any ideas? Does the issue go away if you disable the Chromium sandbox? One difference is that the stat functions are called in a

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Okay, to try to narrow this down a bit, I setup a very large AWS Fedora 33 instance and built chromium packages, then installed them into a second Fedora Rawhide instance. As before, these packages work fine. (This is our baseline) Next, I updated glibc (and JUST glibc, glibc-common, glibc-devel,

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Il 02/01/21 22:57, Kevin Kofler via devel ha scritto: > Tom Callaway wrote: >> I rebuilt chromium, but it did not resolve the issue. > So what can we do to resolve the issue? Surely we cannot leave both Chromium > and Falkon unable to render text forever. > > Kevin Kofler > ___ The

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway wrote: > I rebuilt chromium, but it did not resolve the issue. So what can we do to resolve the issue? Surely we cannot leave both Chromium and Falkon unable to render text forever. Kevin Kofler ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

I rebuilt chromium, but it did not resolve the issue. ~spot On Wed, Dec 30, 2020 at 5:35 PM Marius Schwarz wrote: > Am 30.12.20 um 14:07 schrieb Mattia Verga via devel: > > Il 30/12/20 10:14, Marius Schwarz ha scritto: > >> Don't you need to recompile stuff first to have an effect? :) > >> >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Am 30.12.20 um 14:07 schrieb Mattia Verga via devel: Il 30/12/20 10:14, Marius Schwarz ha scritto: Don't you need to recompile stuff first to have an effect?  :) I've just pushed a rebuild for qt5-qtwebengine, let's see if that's enough. I had a chromium 85 build running instead of the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Il 30/12/20 10:14, Marius Schwarz ha scritto: > > Don't you need to recompile stuff first to have an effect?  :) > > I've just pushed a rebuild for qt5-qtwebengine, let's see if that's enough. Mattia ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Am 30.12.20 um 04:53 schrieb Jeff Law: To be clear (and I know you know this, but your readers might not know), QtWebEngine (qt5-qtwebengine) and Chromium (chromium) are distinct packages (none of them depends on each other), each containing a slightly different copy of essentially the same

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On 12/20/20 7:45 PM, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote: > Neal Gompa wrote: >> QtWebEngine *is* Chromium, so it would make sense that it exhibits the >> same problem. > To be clear (and I know you know this, but your readers might not know), > QtWebEngine (qt5-qtwebengine) and Chromium (chromium)

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Am 17.12.20 um 17:12 schrieb Tom Callaway: Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. Any updates on this? Best regards, Marius Schwarz ___ devel mailing list --

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Neal Gompa wrote: > QtWebEngine *is* Chromium, so it would make sense that it exhibits the > same problem. To be clear (and I know you know this, but your readers might not know), QtWebEngine (qt5-qtwebengine) and Chromium (chromium) are distinct packages (none of them depends on each other),

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Am 17.12.20 um 17:12 schrieb Tom Callaway: Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. Afaik  chromium can't access libva anymore.  On the pinephone, where i noticed this bug, it said so itself. Best regards, Marius

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

I downgraded cairo to 1.16.0-9.fc33 and it had no effect, the bug remained. Thanks, ~spot On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 11:19 AM Kalev Lember wrote: > On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 5:12 PM Tom Callaway wrote: > >> Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through >> rawhide refuses to

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Certainly not ruling out glibc as the problem here, but if it was glibc, I would think the problem would arise when I install the Fedora 33 build in rawhide, and it does not... ~spot On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:10 PM Robbie Harwood wrote: > Tom Callaway writes: > > > I cannot install the

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway writes: > I cannot install the rawhide-built chromium into F33 without bringing glibc > from rawhide with me: > > [spot@localhost ~]$ sudo rpm -Uvh > chromium-common-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm > chromium-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm > error: Failed dependencies: >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 12:02 PM Mattia Verga via devel wrote: > > Il 17/12/20 17:12, Tom Callaway ha scritto: > > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. > > Seems similar to what I reported for Falkon: > >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Il 17/12/20 17:12, Tom Callaway ha scritto: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. Seems similar to what I reported for Falkon: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1904652 Does Chromium uses

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

I cannot install the rawhide-built chromium into F33 without bringing glibc from rawhide with me: [spot@localhost ~]$ sudo rpm -Uvh chromium-common-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm chromium-87.0.4280.88-1.fc34.x86_64.rpm error: Failed dependencies: libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.33)(64bit) is needed by

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Tom Callaway writes: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide > refuses to render most of the strings. > > At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first > build with this problem was built before GCC 11 landed in rawhide (the >

Re: Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 5:12 PM Tom Callaway wrote: > Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through > rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. > > At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first > build with this problem was built before GCC 11

Chromium built in rawhide does not render most strings

Okay, this one has me stumped. Any chromium package I build through rawhide refuses to render most of the strings. At first, I thought this was gcc 11, but then I noticed that the first build with this problem was built before GCC 11 landed in rawhide (the compiler was the same n-v-r as the one