New issue
Advanced search Search tips

Issue 698344 link

Starred by 1 user

Issue metadata

Status: Fixed
Owner:
Closed: Mar 2017
Cc:
Components:
EstimatedDays: ----
NextAction: ----
OS: Chrome
Pri: 3
Type: Bug



Sign in to add a comment

emerge that has RESTRICT=binchecks still performs binchecks and then warns me binchecks are disabled

Project Member Reported by za...@chromium.org, Mar 3 2017

Issue description

The emerge command I use:

$ emerge-tatl fake-package-name

The ">>> Install" step will take an enormous amount of time (minutes!) and spit out some warnings. This is one of them:

readelf: Warning: Section '.GCC.command.line' was not dumped because it does not exist!
File not built with -frecord-gcc-switches: /build/tatl/tmp/portage/<snip>/lib/libpty/linux/x86_64/libpty.so
File not built with -Wl,-z,now: /build/tatl/tmp/portage/<snip>/lib/libpty/linux/x86_64/libpty.so
File not built with gold: /build/tatl/tmp/portage/<snip>/lib/libpty/linux/x86_64/libpty.so

And then at the end it will spit several messages like this:

* QA Notice: RESTRICT=binchecks prevented checks on these ELF files:
* /<snip>/lib/libpty/linux/x86_64/libpty.so

To be fair to the binchecks, they aren't wrong, as these binaries are all downloaded prebuilds that are unlikely to be up to the standards of an local ebuild compile. It's annoying that I explicitly disabled these checks AND they happened anyways at great length AND emerge has the audacity to tell me that the checks were prevented.

Relevant ebuild with the names changed to protect the privacy of the innocent:

EAPI=5

RESTRICT="strip binchecks"

DESCRIPTION="Silly Package Description"
HOMEPAGE="http://example.com/fake-url"
SRC_URI="fake-src-uri.zip"

LICENSE="WTF"
SLOT="0"
KEYWORDS="*"

S="${WORKDIR}/fake-package-name"

RDEPEND="x11-base/xwayland
	app-arch/unzip
	media-fonts/roboto
	x11-libs/libXrender
	x11-libs/libXtst
	x11-libs/libXi
	x11-libs/libxcb
	sys-libs/zlib[abi_x86_32]
	app-arch/bzip2[abi_x86_32]
	sys-libs/ncurses[abi_x86_32]
	sys-libs/gcc-libs"

src_install() {
	insinto /opt/fake-package-name

	doins -r *
}

 

Comment 1 by za...@chromium.org, Mar 3 2017

Summary: emerge that has RESTRICT=binchecks still performs binchecks and then warns me binchecks are disabled (was: emerge that has RESTRICT=binchecks still performs binchecks and then wanrs me binchecks are disabled)
Labels: OS-Chrome
the "file not built" checks are our own hooks in src/scripts/hooks/install/.  they def don't currently look at RESTRICT settings.

the QA notice though i think is from portage itself.

Comment 3 by za...@chromium.org, Mar 6 2017

That makes sense. Do you think it would be worth it to have the install hooks check for it or is that WAI?

Comment 4 by kolos@chromium.org, Mar 10 2017

Components: Privacy

Comment 5 by vapier@chromium.org, Mar 10 2017

Components: -Privacy
Owner: vapier@chromium.org
Status: Started (was: Untriaged)
the install hooks fix is in flight, and i've moved the pngfix question upstream:
  https://bugs.gentoo.org/612254
Project Member

Comment 6 by bugdroid1@chromium.org, Mar 11 2017

The following revision refers to this bug:
  https://chromium.googlesource.com/chromiumos/platform/crosutils/+/fb0d84bed025b4e88d8056d10a8ea84e7b1dbfdf

commit fb0d84bed025b4e88d8056d10a8ea84e7b1dbfdf
Author: Mike Frysinger <vapier@chromium.org>
Date: Sat Mar 11 03:52:33 2017

hooks: respect RESTRICT=binchecks

We use this restrict knob for a few reasons, one of which is to speed
up large binary installs.  Update our hooks to respect it.

BUG= chromium:698344 
TEST=installing a pkg w/RESTRICT=binchecks no longer warns about these issues

Change-Id: Ie9270bc926d3cdecf41b3812b1a440eff2235ea2
Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/450717
Commit-Ready: Mike Frysinger <vapier@chromium.org>
Tested-by: Mike Frysinger <vapier@chromium.org>
Reviewed-by: Zach Reizner <zachr@chromium.org>

[modify] https://crrev.com/fb0d84bed025b4e88d8056d10a8ea84e7b1dbfdf/hooks/install/qa-elf.sh
[modify] https://crrev.com/fb0d84bed025b4e88d8056d10a8ea84e7b1dbfdf/hooks/install/large-file-support.sh

Comment 7 by vapier@chromium.org, Mar 11 2017

Status: Fixed (was: Started)
pngfix is less of an issue, so i'll close this out.  we're talking about making changes in upstream portage, and we'll see about cherry picking back if it makes sense.

Comment 8 by dchan@google.com, May 30 2017

Labels: VerifyIn-60

Comment 9 by dchan@chromium.org, Aug 1 2017

Labels: VerifyIn-61

Comment 10 by dchan@chromium.org, Jan 22 2018

Status: Archived (was: Fixed)
Status: Fixed (was: Archived)

Sign in to add a comment