Bug 5142

Summary:	WARNING: QA Issue on kmod/udev/nfs-utils/gzip/iputils (unsafe references [/ references to /usr/lib])
Product:	[Build System, Metadata & Runtime] OE-Core	Reporter:	Wenzong.Fan <wenzong.fan>
Component:	core	Assignee:	Mark Hatle <mark.hatle>
Status:	RESOLVED WONTFIX	QA Contact:
Severity:	normal
Priority:	Medium	CC:	meta.mr.watcher, meta.watcher, randy.macleod, ross.burton
Version:	1.5
Target Milestone:	Future
Hardware:	x86
OS:	Multiple
Whiteboard:
OS type for building Yocto:	---	Type of Regression:	---
Verified:		Documentation change:	No (bug/feature does not impact docs)

Description Wenzong.Fan 2013-09-09 06:55:40 UTC

There are QA warning to those packages: kmod/udev/nfs-utils/gzip/iputils

WARNING: QA Issue: kmod: /bin/kmod, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libkmod.so.2 => /usr/lib/libkmod.so.2 (0xdead1000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.1.1, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libgobject-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgobject-2.0.so.0 (0xdead3000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.1.1, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libffi.so.6 => /usr/lib/libffi.so.6 (0xdead4000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/libgudev-1.0.so.0.1.1, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libglib-2.0.so.0 => /usr/lib/libglib-2.0.so.0 (0xdead5000)
WARNING: QA Issue: udev: /lib/udev/udevd, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libkmod.so.2 => /usr/lib/libkmod.so.2 (0xdead3000)
WARNING: QA Issue: nfs-utils: Found a reference to /usr/ in /buildarea/wfan/yocto/qa_warning/tmp/work/i586-poky-linux/nfs-utils/1.2.8-r0/packages-split/nfs-utils/sbin/osd_login
WARNING: QA Issue: Shell scripts in base_bindir and base_sbindir should not reference anything in exec_prefix
WARNING: QA Issue: gzip: Found a reference to /usr/ in /buildarea/wfan/yocto/qa_warning/tmp/work/i586-poky-linux/gzip/1.6-r0/packages-split/gzip/bin/gunzip.gzip
WARNING: QA Issue: Shell scripts in base_bindir and base_sbindir should not reference anything in exec_prefix
WARNING: QA Issue: gzip: Found a reference to /usr/ in /buildarea/wfan/yocto/qa_warning/tmp/work/i586-poky-linux/gzip/1.6-r0/packages-split/gzip/bin/zcat.gzip
WARNING: QA Issue: Shell scripts in base_bindir and base_sbindir should not reference anything in exec_prefix
ARNING: QA Issue: iputils: -ping6/bin/ping6.iputils, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libgnutls-openssl.so.27 => /usr/lib/libgnutls-openssl.so.27 (0xdead3000)
WARNING: QA Issue: iputils: -ping6/bin/ping6.iputils, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libgnutls.so.26 => /usr/lib/libgnutls.so.26 (0xdead5000)
WARNING: QA Issue: iputils: -ping6/bin/ping6.iputils, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libgcrypt.so.11 => /usr/lib/libgcrypt.so.11 (0xdead6000)
WARNING: QA Issue: iputils: -ping6/bin/ping6.iputils, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libgpg-error.so.0 => /usr/lib/libgpg-error.so.0 (0xdead7000)
WARNING: QA Issue: iputils: -ping6/bin/ping6.iputils, installed in the base_prefix, requires a shared library under exec_prefix (/usr): libtasn1.so.6 => /usr/lib/libtasn1.so.6 (0xdeada000)

Reproduce steps:
1) Add some more check to meta-yocto/conf/distro/poky.conf:
  -WARN_QA = "textrel files-invalid incompatible-license xorg-driver-abi libdir"
  +WARN_QA = "textrel files-invalid incompatible-license xorg-driver-abi libdir unsafe-references-in-binaries unsafe-references-in-scripts"

2) bitbake kmod/udev/nfs-utils/gzip/iputils

Comment 1 Saul Wold 2013-09-09 17:02:36 UTC

These are known and there is a reason those checks are not currently in QA_WARN, this will be a 1.6 item, if it can be fixed.

Comment 2 Ross Burton 2013-09-12 21:18:20 UTC

See also RP's comment in 5143:

"As previously stated, until someone comes up with a well thought out plan of what should be in /lib and what should be in /usr/lib, I'm not entertaining moving anything else. We *cannot* try and do this piecemeal. Changing the priority to reflect this."

It's probably time for a new bug to reflect the need for a decision, and mark all these as duplicates.

Comment 3 Randy MacLeod 2017-06-22 15:23:50 UTC

If we decide to abandon this feature, we must also remove the QA test.

Comment 4 Randy MacLeod 2017-08-03 13:33:00 UTC

We do not have anyone that requires this feature (separate root and usr). Most linux distros are going this way so it seems pointless to resist the trend. There a good summary of the Debian rational and starting point to read more here:
   https://lwn.net/Articles/670071/