[wwwdocs] a bug report about some deprecated parts of gcc

[David Brown]

On 31/01/2025 14:22, noname noname via Gcc wrote:
> hello, I'm a regular user of Fedora 41 Workstation. I usually install all
> my apps through one command which has tons of packages to it. So I'm not
> sure which one of them pulled gcc as a dependency. But either way. While
> installing all of them, dnf said:
> 
> [128/579] Installing libgcc-0:14.2.1-3.fc41.i686      100%
> [==================] | 569.6 KiB/s | 303.4 KiB | -00m00s
>>>> Running post-install criptlet: libgcc-0:14.2.1-3.fc41.i686
> warning: posix.fork(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are
> deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead
> warning: posix.wait(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are
> deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead
> warning: posix.exec(): .fork(), .exec(), .wait() and .redirect2null() are
> deprecated, use rpm.spawn() or rpm.execute() instead
> [128/579] Installing libgcc-0:14.2.1-3.fc41.i686
> 100% | 134.1 KiB/s | 303.4 KiB |  00m02s
> [129/579] Installing glibc-gconv-extra-0:2.40-12.fc41.i686
> 100% |   1.7 MiB/s |   7.5 MiB |  00m04s
> [130/579] Installing glibc-0:2.40-12.fc41.i686
> 100% |   1.5 MiB/s |   5.5 MiB |  00m04s
> 
> (I included several more package installation reports after the warnings,
> just in case)
> even though this happened, I haven't noticed any of the apps breaking or
> anything. Still, I decided to report this to you either way, since it could
> be important. I'm sorry if I'm not using a correct mailing list for this,
> I'm a very non-tech person, so I have no clue how to do this. Also, I'm
> sorry if this is something I should've rather reported to Fedora's
> packagers of libgcc. I'll probably let them know of this too, just in case.
> 

This does appear to be an issue with the Fedora packaging of gcc, and 
has nothing to do with gcc itself.  For most Linux distros, packages are 
made with a tarball of the actual program and files, along with scripts 
for installation and setup (and information data, and no doubt other 
things).  This looks like they the scripts are using outdated or 
deprecated calls.  So yes, the Fedora packagers would be the ones who 
would appreciate the bug report.