diff --git a/macros.package-notes-srpm b/macros.package-notes-srpm index d44e659..0cd369b 100644 --- a/macros.package-notes-srpm +++ b/macros.package-notes-srpm @@ -1,9 +1,50 @@ +# This file is part of the package-notes package. +# # Add an ELF note with information about the package the code was compiled for. # See https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Package_information_on_ELF_objects # for details. +# +# To opt out of the use of this feature completely, include this in +# the spec file: +# +# %undefine _package_note_file +# +# The other macros can be undefined too to replace parts of the +# functionality. If %_generate_package_note_file is undefined, the +# linker script will not be generated, but the link flags may still +# refer to it. This may be useful if the default generation method is +# insufficient and a different mechanism will be used to generate +# %_package_note_file. If %_package_note_flags is undefined, the +# linker argument that injects the script will not be added to +# %build_ldfags, but the linker script would still be generated. + +# The name of the file with the linker script. If %{buildsubdir} is +# defined, the file will be placed therein. Otherwise, one level up, +# directly in %{_builddir}. +# +# Note that %{version}-%{release} used here might be redefined from +# the "primary" values when subpackages with different version-release +# are specified. The contents of the script use the shell variable +# $RPM_PACKAGE_NAME, $RPM_PACKAGE_VERSION, $RPM_PACKAGE_RELEASE, +# and $RPM_ARCH that are set early and seem to always contain the "primary" +# values for the main package. %_package_note_file %{_builddir}%{?buildsubdir:/%{buildsubdir}}/.package_note-%{name}-%{version}-%{release}.%{_arch}.ld -%_package_note_readonly 1 -%_package_note_flags %{?_package_note_file:%{?name:%["%_target_cpu" == "noarch"?"":"-Wl,-dT,%{_package_note_file}"]}} +# Which linker will be used? Unfortunately linkers other than bfd do not +# support some of the options that we'd like to use. This can be set to +# disable the READONLY attribute and do other tweaks so linking works with +# the alternative linkers. This should be either "bfd", "gold", or "lld". +%_package_note_linker bfd -%_generate_package_note_file %{?_package_note_file:%{?name:%["%_target_cpu" == "noarch"?"":"if [ -f %{_rpmconfigdir}/generate-rpm-note.sh ]; then %{_rpmconfigdir}/generate-rpm-note.sh %{!?_package_note_readonly:--readonly=no} ${RPM_PACKAGE_NAME:?} ${RPM_PACKAGE_VERSION:?}-${RPM_PACKAGE_RELEASE:?} ${RPM_ARCH:?} >%{_package_note_file}; fi"]}} +# Whether to specify the READONLY attribute for the inserted +# section. We generally want this, but binutils <= 2.37 and other +# linkers do not support it. +%_package_note_readonly %["%_package_note_linker" == "bfd"?"1":"0"] + +# The linker flags to be passed to the compiler to insert the notes section. +%_package_note_flags %{?_package_note_file:%{?name:%["%_target_cpu" == "noarch"?"":"-Wl,%["%_package_note_linker" == "bfd"?"-dT":"-T"],%{_package_note_file}"]}} + +# The command to actually generate the linker script that inserts the +# notes file. This command is automatically used as part of the build +# preamble. +%_generate_package_note_file %{?_package_note_file:%{?name:%["%_target_cpu" == "noarch"?"":"if [ -f %{_rpmconfigdir}/generate-rpm-note.sh ]; then %{_rpmconfigdir}/generate-rpm-note.sh %[0%{?_package_note_readonly}?"":"--readonly=no "]${RPM_PACKAGE_NAME:?} ${RPM_PACKAGE_VERSION:?}-${RPM_PACKAGE_RELEASE:?} ${RPM_ARCH:?} >%{_package_note_file}; fi"]}}