From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0269D24BBF4 for ; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 00:24:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770337457; cv=none; b=KrG9EBWKgH6Ynw9OujTiMM7MRxJrexf4RMqUy+IW7dnXK6E6uq/iuRn9gJNM7VnPhm9tG+NZrUsKITLJrK3dciqdKiyeexv8ydVktOrjRxUX3FfJN52hgXzXvJGvjqZM0wBUiO+Ejb+/2RDSq6x0wDxTCJ9E8rKLhL4Qi6LwiDk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1770337457; c=relaxed/simple; bh=dv/PrKi0Wt1HHCMqGTIiUpdsfJDEJ6+ll+Vv3aj3yGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=E3lJPv//P8W+BvJ2yDMBpmLznwbVzUyBKGTUvgkFBBqdsj8Vtnt6aAc6aX+c8u1RiVnmVv08Q66SU/cp1/WWNGVxy+0qMMkE9Gl2MRgzsQz2UV2j9So3qf/eNHYlIJWSw8gTomsMv/KmT35po7m8+l5v/JweALQR5Q5HI+E4IdY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QJAGJrq7; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QJAGJrq7" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 85C7BC19425; Fri, 6 Feb 2026 00:24:15 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1770337456; bh=dv/PrKi0Wt1HHCMqGTIiUpdsfJDEJ6+ll+Vv3aj3yGw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=QJAGJrq7ypRIWmZzHDp48O1UM8k9cPxjHUFjrl8aUKuyMYCcCoYo7uHhmAIqrvFU6 fCOGRD3ujCJihxruLOzI0/gujJ90VdCBf2hyAEJGkvWym4zzqZjbnZ7tQZV7c45uFE wTomu2gF8WXmVmNgnjCW+Dgc3mgY682gRYfdsox7bObXN6Krb9ECdp15KBv0uJZpZ8 67ure7HahcyWtmYykbgWpt/qzwKNE6IBf6Um8qjfhB1sUUV3+jq9nnoVfh995Gid0J 57i2j1afOW1BNkwEMohxo88CIaYG1PF/picz5OGlbhDME39ei6ewkI8iteU2uavxX4 MilTLk3SCZCGw== Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2026 17:24:12 -0700 From: Nathan Chancellor To: Steve French Cc: Nicolas Schier , LKML , Holger Kiehl Subject: Re: Regression with patch "kbuild: rpm-pkg: Generate debuginfo package manually" Message-ID: <20260206002412.GB2975087@ax162> References: Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Hi Steve, On Thu, Feb 05, 2026 at 05:56:20PM -0600, Steve French wrote: > I noticed with the recent patch below: > > commit 62089b804895e845f82e132ea9d46a1fc53ed5a7 > Author: Nathan Chancellor > Date: Wed Jan 21 15:29:15 2026 -0700 > > kbuild: rpm-pkg: Generate debuginfo package manually > > that all of our test builds were failing to build kernel RPMs for > 6.19-rc8 and later (see e.g. > http://osmb311-linux-testing.southcentralus.cloudapp.azure.com/#/builders/1/builds/99/steps/9/logs/stdio). Sorry for the breakage :( Can you provide me with the .config? I want to see if I can reproduce this locally. > See below: > > Processing files: kernel-devel-6.19.0_rc8-1.x86_64 > warning: absolute symlink: /lib/modules/6.19.0-rc8/build -> > /usr/src/kernels/6.19.0-rc8 > Provides: kernel-devel = 6.19.0_rc8-1 kernel-devel(x86-64) = 6.19.0_rc8-1 > Requires(rpmlib): rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1 > rpmlib(FileDigests) <= 4.6.0-1 rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1 > Checking for unpackaged file(s): /usr/lib/rpm/check-files > /build/cifs-2.6/rpmbuild/BUILDROOT/kernel-6.19.0_rc8-1.x86_64 > error: Installed (but unpackaged) file(s) found: > /debuginfo.list > /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/00/0cc2949a2b2de29e4bd4ce4aa4bf977b3f973f.debug ... > ... > > This is building kernel rpms on a RHEL9.7 system to be copied over to > our Fedora test VMs. The kernel build works fine but the rpm packaging > now fails. Works fine for 6.19-rc7 (or 6.19-rc8 with this commit > reverted) but fails on 6.19-rc8. I wonder if we are relying on something in a newer rpm version that is not available on an older version that is present in RHEL. > Any idea how to fix this build regression. Opting out of the debuginfo package with RPM_OPTS='--without debuginfo' would be a quick solution I think but obviously I would like to develop a more comprehensive fix. Cheers, Nathan