[Bug 1205633] New: [Build 20221121] conflicting build ids between java 17 and 19 ?
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633 Bug ID: 1205633 Summary: [Build 20221121] conflicting build ids between java 17 and 19 ? Classification: openSUSE Product: openSUSE Tumbleweed Version: Current Hardware: Other URL: https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/2894164/modules/java /steps/6 OS: Other Status: NEW Severity: Normal Priority: P5 - None Component: Java Assignee: java-maintainers@suse.de Reporter: dimstar@opensuse.org QA Contact: qa-bugs@suse.de Found By: openQA Blocker: Yes ## Observation File /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e7/bbd33378fe004cca98af6bae40d9ad9de09e60 from install of java-17-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-17.0.5.0-2.1.x86_64 (OSS_DEBUGINFO) conflicts with file from install of java-19-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-19.0.1.0-1.1.x86_64 (OSS_DEBUGINFO) File /usr/lib/debug/.build-id/e7/bbd33378fe004cca98af6bae40d9ad9de09e60.debug from install of java-17-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-17.0.5.0-2.1.x86_64 (OSS_DEBUGINFO) conflicts with file from install of java-19-openjdk-headless-debuginfo-19.0.1.0-1.1.x86_64 (OSS_DEBUGINFO) Two files having the same build id is very rare and somewhat smells like pre-built binaries. openQA test in scenario opensuse-Tumbleweed-JeOS-for-kvm-and-xen-x86_64-jeos-extra@64bit_virtio-2G fails in [java](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/2894164/modules/java/steps/6) ## Test suite description Same as jeos, plus some more tests. ## Reproducible Fails since (at least) Build [20210824](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1885703) ## Expected result Last good: [20210823](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/1884770) (or more recent) ## Further details Always latest result in this scenario: [latest](https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/latest?arch=x86_64&distri=opensuse&flavor=JeOS-for-kvm-and-xen&machine=64bit_virtio-2G&test=jeos-extra&version=Tumbleweed) -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633#c1 Fridrich Strba <fstrba@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |fstrba@suse.com --- Comment #1 from Fridrich Strba <fstrba@suse.com> --- Now the culprit is /usr/lib64/jvm/java-17-openjdk-17/lib/libjsvml.so for the java-17 and the corresponding file for java-19. In the source-code, that library is purely assembly written. They are all mathematical functions. Now, my question for the wise people is: Is it possible that if a library is purely assembly, the same compiler will produce two identical results? Now, how to achieve a difference there? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633#c2 Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |mliska@suse.cz Flags| |needinfo?(mliska@suse.cz) --- Comment #2 from Dominique Leuenberger <dimstar@opensuse.org> --- @Martin, do you have an idea here? Or is this something we 'just have to accept' ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633 http://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1205633#c3 Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |martin.liska@suse.com Flags|needinfo?(mliska@suse.cz) | --- Comment #3 from Martin Li��ka <martin.liska@suse.com> ---
Now, how to achieve a difference there?
Sure, so the difference is definitely possible. The easiest approach can be to add one more assembly file that will contain something like: $ cat i.s .ident "java version 19" Or you can link it with a .c file that will contain something like: $ cat i.c int __dummu_java_version = 17; -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
participants (1)
-
bugzilla_noreply＠suse.com