From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 95B2DC43219 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 22:37:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A9FF20651 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 22:37:26 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="MHkjAOjJ" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729653AbfD2WhU (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:20 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-f68.google.com ([209.85.167.68]:44173 "EHLO mail-lf1-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729481AbfD2WhU (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:20 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-f68.google.com with SMTP id h18so9120275lfj.11 for ; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 15:37:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=paul-moore-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=l2dc72lRn+QYapuQ0yA9PTxioiCc/T7YC5XTZWj4UPk=; b=MHkjAOjJ1zlE288eNCi6RUf76K4Ap+c0kFui0qtM+27x6jAsGsBRKcWFtVY3ouRBia c0c4Ue2F9PtcCyie8kp3hAkzCNk86fly/TyN4EZWqMOulVg3ByZsGG8GXtKWTSoXilIP iGWIzyEcqm86bWKghFP2A0OFPzW06Bdb3lfiwBhOY2tqFql2K6VcpgdG3ZnMimp8+OUO /i3Y23FpPkTkX+pDZUXck5cPKuQysX9TQRJdl/QToK1phYA9+UETKkKe42ptZQOjlGMM WiP1G+I2n6VnccugZpUI5De/dHzAv1+iaXiJI8dWVKoFuw0rDuDL6SH4KwOBOd3bcDYq P9TQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=l2dc72lRn+QYapuQ0yA9PTxioiCc/T7YC5XTZWj4UPk=; b=VyTpc3CXbXos4f0faXkZkgulogKB+341vfxs83YD1dCJQP4VWOUqnnnm923NIw70UI xTBbEFTXMUO5gey/G2pe+fGnjaz9CRX4P0mqeXCf83Pp8XSL0mC6w910p0PgwhWOr8Hj a/UHorT+9wXaON+Bj3IrvZBHfNx3LSOmiQZP4UGQxawjz+HfGlYtRQvtO4bhRJIR5mXy oJ21cIg7iDwzp5aKiSCspieLkbe2JE+76tq8dU0AoagTApiQ0yIHUuwIyZOo5cyVMnRV 1UI86a1+eY0h8ti/u8+0BxsgivEbO6YH8aPHukVmovg0e7AldfTsyM0dI2RbX/fgLHXZ GbBg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAUJOiGGyhPdkkXwmdOmlpV5d7rSk/KcOA1/6y6UoHop/OLz78C7 ks1WmKXFNSQQTwa3SXKA2FcI5S4DdSvcxhp4hQcy X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyWufR/IKGaa7TNZVDs6IZzBW+yXtG00anJgANfJMC8ALjMgxbcJ9J8w83x7kZRKocksidJKfy0K6pdvI9LorM= X-Received: by 2002:a19:7702:: with SMTP id s2mr35331595lfc.102.1556577436849; Mon, 29 Apr 2019 15:37:16 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190422210041.GA21711@archlinux-i9> <20190423132926.GK17719@sasha-vm> <20190429124002.GB31371@kroah.com> <20190429140906.GA7412@kroah.com> <20190429145248.GA7111@kroah.com> In-Reply-To: <20190429145248.GA7111@kroah.com> From: Paul Moore Date: Mon, 29 Apr 2019 18:37:03 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: scripts/selinux build error in 4.14 after glibc update To: Greg KH Cc: Sasha Levin , Nathan Chancellor , Stephen Smalley , Eric Paris , selinux@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@vger.kernel.org, Nicolas Iooss Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: selinux-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: selinux@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:52 AM Greg KH wrote: > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:47:00AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:09 AM Greg KH wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 10:02:29AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 8:40 AM Greg KH wrote: > > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 09:43:09AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > On Tue, Apr 23, 2019 at 9:29 AM Sasha Levin wrote: > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 09:59:47PM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > > > > > > >On Mon, Apr 22, 2019 at 5:00 PM Nathan Chancellor > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> Hi all, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> After a glibc update to 2.29, my 4.14 builds started failing like so: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> HOSTCC scripts/selinux/genheaders/genheaders > > > > > > > >> In file included from scripts/selinux/genheaders/genheaders.c:19: > > > > > > > >> ./security/selinux/include/classmap.h:245:2: error: #error New address family defined, please update secclass_map. > > > > > > > >> #error New address family defined, please update secclass_map. > > > > > > > >> ^~~~~ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >This is a known problem that has a fix in the selinux/next branch and > > > > > > > >will be going up to Linus during the next merge window. The fix is > > > > > > > >quite small and should be relatively easy for you to backport to your > > > > > > > >kernel build if you are interested; the patch can be found at the > > > > > > > >archive link below: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >https://lore.kernel.org/selinux/20190225005528.28371-1-paulo@paulo.ac > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Why is it waiting for the next merge window? It fixes a build bug that > > > > > > > people hit. > > > > > > > > > > > > I place a reasonably high bar on patches that I send up to Linus > > > > > > outside of the merge window and I didn't feel this patch met that > > > > > > criteria. Nathan is only the second person I've seen who has > > > > > > encountered this problem, the first being the original patch author. > > > > > > As far as I've seen, the problem is only seen by users building older > > > > > > kernels on very new userspaces (e.g. glibc v2.29 was released in > > > > > > February 2019, Linux v4.14 was released in 2017); this doesn't appear > > > > > > to be a large group of people and I didn't want to risk breaking the > > > > > > main kernel tree during the -rcX phase for such a small group. > > > > > > > > > > Ugh, this breaks my local builds, I would recommend getting it to Linus > > > > > sooner please. > > > > > > > > Well, we are at -rc7 right now and it looks like an -rc8 is unlikely > > > > so the question really comes down to can/do you want to wait a week? > > > > > > It's a regression in the 5.1-rc tree, that is hitting people now. Why > > > do you want to have a 5.1-final that is known to be broken? > > > > I believe I answered that in my reply to Sasha. Can you answer the > > question I asked of you above? > > If you don't submit it this week, I guess I can wait as I have no other > choice. > > But note, this did break my build systems, and my main development > system this weekend. So yes, the number of people being affected might > be "small", but that "small" number includes the people responsible for > maintaining those stable kernels :( > > Anyway, it's your call, just letting you know I'm really annoyed at the > moment by this... It's against my better judgement, but I'll send a PR up to Linus now. -- paul moore www.paul-moore.com