gcc: RPM_ARCH not defined

[Lukas Javorsky]

Hi,

I've been looking at our upstreamed test [1] for libarchive package and it
started to fail since Fedora 37.

The error is: "gcc: fatal error: environment variable 'RPM_ARCH' not defined
"

Prior to the Fedora 37 the test was passing without any issue.

Did anyone here had a similar problem?
Or could anyone help me find out what has changed so it's causing this
issue?

[1]
https://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/libarchive/blob/main/f/Sanity/Basic-s...

Thank you so much for your help

-- 
S pozdravom/ Best regards

Lukáš Javorský

Software Engineer, Core service - Databases

Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>

Purkyňova 115 (TPB-C)

612 00 Brno - Královo Pole

ljavorsk(a)redhat.com
<https://www.redhat.com>

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Lukas Javorsky wrote on 2023/01/23 21:39:
>  Hi,
>  
>  I've been looking at our upstreamed test [1] for libarchive package and it
>  started to fail since Fedora 37.
>  
>  The error is: "gcc: fatal error: environment variable 'RPM_ARCH' not
> defined
>  "
>  
>  Prior to the Fedora 37 the test was passing without any issue.
>  
>  Did anyone here had a similar problem?
>  Or could anyone help me find out what has changed so it's causing this
>  issue?
>  
>  [1]
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/libarchive/blob/main/f/Sanity/Basic-s...
>  
>  Thank you so much for your help 
Most possibly due to "package note".

`rpmbuild -bc` defines  %{_package_note_flags}, embeds
"-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes"
to LDFLAGS, which needs "RPM_ARCH" environment. During rpmbuild process, this
environment is provided,
but then later "make" process does not define this automatically (because this
process is not under
"rpmbuild"), so embedded
"-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" LDFLAGS complains about
missing environment.

(Yes, I think this is annoying - sometimes rpmbuild fails with some reason, I try to fix
compilation error
  then try executing "make" locally, then I see linker complains about
"'RPM_ARCH' not defined"...)

I usually write "%_package_note_flags %nil" to ~/.rpmmacros, not sure if
rpmbuild command line can
undefine macros.

Regards,
Mamoru

[Mamoru TASAKA]

Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2023/01/23 21:54:
>  Lukas Javorsky wrote on 2023/01/23 21:39:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've been looking at our upstreamed test [1] for libarchive package and it
> > started to fail since Fedora 37.
> >
> > The error is: "gcc: fatal error: environment variable 'RPM_ARCH' not
> defined
> > "
> >
> > Prior to the Fedora 37 the test was passing without any issue.
> >
> > Did anyone here had a similar problem?
> > Or could anyone help me find out what has changed so it's causing this
> > issue?
> >
> > [1]
> >
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/libarchive/blob/main/f/Sanity/Basic-s...
> >
> > Thank you so much for your help
>  
>  Most possibly due to "package note".
>  
>  `rpmbuild -bc` defines  %{_package_note_flags}, embeds
> "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes"
>  to LDFLAGS, which needs "RPM_ARCH" environment. During rpmbuild process, this
> environment is provided,
>  but then later "make" process does not define this automatically (because this
> process is not under
>  "rpmbuild"), so embedded
> "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" LDFLAGS complains about
>  missing environment.
>  
>  (Yes, I think this is annoying - sometimes rpmbuild fails with some reason, I try to fix
> compilation error
>    then try executing "make" locally, then I see linker complains about
> "'RPM_ARCH' not defined"...)
>  
>  I usually write "%_package_note_flags %nil" to ~/.rpmmacros, not sure if
> rpmbuild command line can
>  undefine macros.
>   
Or maybe changing to "rpmbuild --define '_package_note_flags %nil' -bc
libarchive.spec" can fix the
issue you see.

Mamoru

[Tomas Korbar]

Hello,
since i encountered this in the past and postponed it, I did a bit of a
digging and found this:
As you probably found out by now it is caused by package-notes being
dependent
on environment variables that are expected to be present during package
build.
See the actual package-notes file contents:
$ cat /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes
*link:
+
--package-metadata={\"type\":\"rpm\",\"name\":\"%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_NAME
\",\"version\":\"%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_VERSION
-%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_RELEASE
\",\"architecture\":\"%:getenv(RPM_ARCH
\",\"osCpe\":\"cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:38\"}))))

I took a look at your test and found out that your test uses rpmbuild to
perform
preparation of sources:
        rlRun "rpmbuild -bp libarchive.spec"
        rlRun "rpmbuild -bc libarchive.spec"
        rlRun "popd"

This probably executes configure in a way that configures linking to be
done with "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" option and thus
you now need the environment variables that the file mentions. These
variables
are defined and exported before build stage in macro defined in file
/usr/lib/rpm/macros and if you would have executed the check phase with
rpmbuild command, you would propably face no issue (did not verify this).
Unfortunately the test performs check manually:
                rlRun "make check &> $TmpDir/make_check.log" 0 "Make
check"
                rlRun -s "./libarchive_test"
                rlAssertGrep "Tests failed:[[:blank:]]* 0" $rlRun_LOG
and thus there are no environment variables.
This can be fixed by a little bit of a hack. Add this line:
rlRun 'eval "$(rpm --eval %___build_pre)"; cd
~/rpmbuild/BUILD/libarchive-*' 0 "setting environment"

before the make check and you are good to go. This causes
that needed environment variables will be defined.

I hope that this helps you or based on this information you will be able
to find a better solution.

Best Regards.


On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 2:00 PM Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
wrote:

>  Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2023/01/23 21:54:
>  > Lukas Javorsky wrote on 2023/01/23 21:39:
>  >> Hi,
>  >>
>  >> I've been looking at our upstreamed test [1] for libarchive package and
>  it
>  >> started to fail since Fedora 37.
>  >>
>  >> The error is: "gcc: fatal error: environment variable 'RPM_ARCH'
> not
>  defined
>  >> "
>  >>
>  >> Prior to the Fedora 37 the test was passing without any issue.
>  >>
>  >> Did anyone here had a similar problem?
>  >> Or could anyone help me find out what has changed so it's causing this
>  >> issue?
>  >>
>  >> [1]
>  >>
>
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/libarchive/blob/main/f/Sanity/Basic-s...
>  >>
>  >> Thank you so much for your help
>  >
>  > Most possibly due to "package note".
>  >
>  > `rpmbuild -bc` defines  %{_package_note_flags}, embeds
>  "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes"
>  > to LDFLAGS, which needs "RPM_ARCH" environment. During rpmbuild process,
>  this environment is provided,
>  > but then later "make" process does not define this automatically
>  (because this process is not under
>  > "rpmbuild"), so embedded
>  "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" LDFLAGS complains about
>  > missing environment.
>  >
>  > (Yes, I think this is annoying - sometimes rpmbuild fails with some
>  reason, I try to fix compilation error
>  >   then try executing "make" locally, then I see linker complains about
>  "'RPM_ARCH' not defined"...)
>  >
>  > I usually write "%_package_note_flags %nil" to ~/.rpmmacros, not sure if
>  rpmbuild command line can
>  > undefine macros.
>  >
>
>  Or maybe changing to "rpmbuild --define '_package_note_flags %nil' -bc
>  libarchive.spec" can fix the
>  issue you see.
>
>  Mamoru
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)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/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>

[Lukas Javorsky]

Thank you, Tomas,

Great investigation.

Your suggested hack really fixed my issue.

On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 3:46 PM Tomas Korbar <tkorbar(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote:

>  Hello,
>  since i encountered this in the past and postponed it, I did a bit of a
>  digging and found this:
>  As you probably found out by now it is caused by package-notes being
>  dependent
>  on environment variables that are expected to be present during package
>  build.
>  See the actual package-notes file contents:
>  $ cat /usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes
>  *link:
>  +
>
> --package-metadata={\"type\":\"rpm\",\"name\":\"%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_NAME
>  \",\"version\":\"%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_VERSION
> -%:getenv(RPM_PACKAGE_RELEASE
>  \",\"architecture\":\"%:getenv(RPM_ARCH
>  \",\"osCpe\":\"cpe:/o:fedoraproject:fedora:38\"}))))
>
>  I took a look at your test and found out that your test uses rpmbuild to
>  perform
>  preparation of sources:
>          rlRun "rpmbuild -bp libarchive.spec"
>          rlRun "rpmbuild -bc libarchive.spec"
>          rlRun "popd"
>
>  This probably executes configure in a way that configures linking to be
>  done with "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" option and thus
>  you now need the environment variables that the file mentions. These
>  variables
>  are defined and exported before build stage in macro defined in file
>  /usr/lib/rpm/macros and if you would have executed the check phase with
>  rpmbuild command, you would propably face no issue (did not verify this).
>  Unfortunately the test performs check manually:
>                  rlRun "make check &> $TmpDir/make_check.log" 0
> "Make check"
>                  rlRun -s "./libarchive_test"
>                  rlAssertGrep "Tests failed:[[:blank:]]* 0" $rlRun_LOG
>  and thus there are no environment variables.
>  This can be fixed by a little bit of a hack. Add this line:
>  rlRun 'eval "$(rpm --eval %___build_pre)"; cd
>  ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/libarchive-*' 0 "setting environment"
>
>  before the make check and you are good to go. This causes
>  that needed environment variables will be defined.
>
>  I hope that this helps you or based on this information you will be able
>  to find a better solution.
>
>  Best Regards.
>
>
>  On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 2:00 PM Mamoru TASAKA <mtasaka(a)fedoraproject.org&gt;
>  wrote:
>
> > Mamoru TASAKA wrote on 2023/01/23 21:54:
> > > Lukas Javorsky wrote on 2023/01/23 21:39:
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> I've been looking at our upstreamed test [1] for libarchive package
> > and it
> > >> started to fail since Fedora 37.
> > >>
> > >> The error is: "gcc: fatal error: environment variable
> 'RPM_ARCH' not
> > defined
> > >> "
> > >>
> > >> Prior to the Fedora 37 the test was passing without any issue.
> > >>
> > >> Did anyone here had a similar problem?
> > >> Or could anyone help me find out what has changed so it's causing this
> > >> issue?
> > >>
> > >> [1]
> > >>
> >
> https://src.fedoraproject.org/tests/libarchive/blob/main/f/Sanity/Basic-s...
> > >>
> > >> Thank you so much for your help
> > >
> > > Most possibly due to "package note".
> > >
> > > `rpmbuild -bc` defines  %{_package_note_flags}, embeds
> > "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes"
> > > to LDFLAGS, which needs "RPM_ARCH" environment. During rpmbuild
> > process, this environment is provided,
> > > but then later "make" process does not define this automatically
> > (because this process is not under
> > > "rpmbuild"), so embedded
> > "-specs=/usr/lib/rpm/redhat/redhat-package-notes" LDFLAGS complains about
> > > missing environment.
> > >
> > > (Yes, I think this is annoying - sometimes rpmbuild fails with some
> > reason, I try to fix compilation error
> > >   then try executing "make" locally, then I see linker complains
> about
> > "'RPM_ARCH' not defined"...)
> > >
> > > I usually write "%_package_note_flags %nil" to ~/.rpmmacros, not sure
> > if rpmbuild command line can
> > > undefine macros.
> > >
> >
> > Or maybe changing to "rpmbuild --define '_package_note_flags %nil' -bc
> > libarchive.spec" can fix the
> > issue you see.
> >
> > Mamoru
> > _______________________________________________
> > devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)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/[e-mail]
> > Do not reply to spam, report it:
> > https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
> >
>  _______________________________________________
>  devel mailing list -- devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave(a)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/[e-mail]
>  Do not reply to spam, report it:
>  https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>  

-- 
S pozdravom/ Best regards

Lukáš Javorský

Software Engineer, Core service - Databases

Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com>

Purkyňova 115 (TPB-C)

612 00 Brno - Královo Pole

ljavorsk(a)redhat.com
<https://www.redhat.com>