[Bug 225969] Merge Review: kernel

[Dave Jones]

Spot went through this bug that has been around forever, and wrote up
some review comments.  I cleaned up some of the low hanging fruit, but
there's still a few that I'm uncertain on.  input welcomed.

 > kernel.x86_64: E: shared-lib-without-dependency-information
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso32-syscall.so
 > kernel.x86_64: E: shared-lib-without-dependency-information
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso.so
 > kernel.x86_64: E: shared-lib-without-dependency-information
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso32-int80.so
 > kernel.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso32-syscall.so
 > kernel.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso.so
 > kernel.x86_64: E: missing-PT_GNU_STACK-section
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/vdso/vdso32-int80.so
 > 
 > (I don't begin to claim that I understand what's happening here, but I suspect
 > that these vdso files server a specific purpose and that these warnings do not
 > apply to them.)

I'm going to assume this is to be expected, as they aren't 'real' libraries. Roland ?

 > kernel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
 > 
 > (At a minimum, COPYING should be present as %doc with the GPLv2 terms.)

I'm not sure this makes sense when we have a kernel-doc package. 
Though I note we don't have COPYING in there either.

 > kernel.x86_64: W: dangling-relative-symlink
 > /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build
 > ../../../usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64
 > 
 > (It seems odd that /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build is packaged in
 > kernel, but the symlink it points to is in kernel-devel. Is there a reason that
 > the /lib/modules/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/build ownership isn't in kernel-devel?)

We flip-flopped on this a few years ago. It used to be that way iirc, but I'm
not recalling the exact reasoning for why it changed.

 > kernel.x86_64: W: non-conffile-in-etc
 > /etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernel-2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64.conf
 > 
 > (Should this be marked as %config(noreplace)?)

it's versioned, so no ? I think ?

 > kernel-devel.x86_64: W: no-documentation
 > (There are documentation files included in kernel-devel, they are not marked as
 > %doc though. Recognizing that the kernel-devel file list is autogenerated, I
 > can't see a good way to accomplish this file marking, so I propose that this is
 > safe to ignore.)

ack. 

 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: zero-length
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/include/config/fb/via.h
 > [ ... repeated for several hundred empty kernel .h files ... ]
 > 
 > (I assume that all of these zero length header files are kernel header files
 > which are not intended to be exposed/exported to userspace. Perhaps it makes
 > sense to iterate through the buildroot at the end of install and delete all of
 > the zero length header files? Might speed up the -devel transaction.)

Something in the tree could be #include'ing them, but I don't see anything
from a quick grep.  Not sure about this.  (They're autogenerated, and their
content varies depending on CONFIG options being set).

 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/rt-tester/rt-tester.py 0644L
 > /usr/bin/python
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/headers_install.pl 0644L
 > /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/gcc-x86_32-has-stack-protector.sh
 > 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/gfp-translate 0644L /bin/bash
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/kconfig/lxdialog/check-lxdialog.sh
 > 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/export_report.pl 0644L
 > /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/mksysmap 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/package/builddeb 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/gen_initramfs_list.sh 0644L
 > /bin/bash
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/bootgraph.pl 0644L /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/tracing/draw_functrace.py 0644L
 > /usr/bin/python
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/headers_check.pl 0644L
 > /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/selinux/install_policy.sh 0644L
 > /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/gcc-version.sh 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/profile2linkerlist.pl 0644L
 > /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/kconfig/streamline_config.pl
 > 0644L /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/markup_oops.pl 0644L
 > /usr/bin/perl
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/mkmakefile 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/package/buildtar 0644L /bin/sh
 > kernel-devel.x86_64: E: non-executable-script
 > /usr/src/kernels/2.6.36-1.fc15.x86_64/scripts/gcc-x86_64-has-stack-protector.sh
 > 0644L /bin/sh
 > 
 > (These script files are being packaged, but probably set to chmod -x to prevent
 > kernel-devel from picking up dependencies. This list of files should be
 > reviewed to see whether they should remain in kernel-devel or be deleted from
 > the buildroot at the end of %install. If any of these files are useful and are
 > kept in kernel-devel, they should be set executable so proper dependencies are
 > found for these scripts by RPM.)

I think we can probably just kill all of these.


everything else on spots list I committed already.


	Dave