lto build failed with ninja

[gengjiawen]

ninja: Entering directory `out/Release'
ninja: error: obj/deps/openssl/openssl-fipsmodule.ninja:879: bad $-escape (literal $ must be written as $$)
    -Wl,--version-script=$(srcdir)/deps/openssl/config/archs/linux-x86_6...
                         ^ near here

cc @danbev @nodejs/build-files

https://github.com/nodejs/node/runs/3933310474?check_suite_focus=true

[danbev]

This is caused by a variable that is being used for the version/linker script which was a late fix as it was an absolut path previously.

To reproduce:

$ configure --openssl-is-fips --ninja
$ ./ninja -C out/Release

One option might be to include config.mk in deps/openssl/config/Makefile and then pass BUILD_WITH to deps/openssl/config/generate_gypi.ln where it could check the type of build that is configured. But since these generated files are then checked in that would not work for make then and only ninja and we would have to perhaps have an extra openssl-fips.gypi-template for ninja build which does not sounds very nice to me.

Just trying this out locally there is another issue with the FIPS build and ninja after fixing the escape character above:

$ ninja -v -C out/Release
ninja: Entering directory `out/Release'
ninja: error: 'obj/deps/openssl/libopenssl-fipsmodule.so', needed by 'obj/deps/openssl/fipsmodule.cnf', missing and no known rule to make it

Perhaps we could use make for this job or alternatively remove the --openssl-is-fips flag until this issue is fixed?
I've got a suggestion for fixing this and I'll link to a PR shortly.

[richardlau]

@danbev I'm a bit confused -- the daily LTO GitHub actions builds don't use the --openssl-is-fips configure flag:

node/.github/workflows/daily.yml

Line 27 in f69a4f6

./configure --enable-lto --ninja

[danbev]

Hmm, I was able to reproduce this using --enable-fips but perhaps this also happens with --enable-lto in combination with --ninja. I'll give that a try as well but I think I've got something that will work for both make and ninja.

[danbev]

Does anyone know of a way to re-run that job but using the the linked PR?

[targos]

Does anyone know of a way to re-run that job but using the the linked PR?

AFAIK, you can only do that if the job is configured for it with inputs (like this one in CITGM)

[danbev]

I was able to reproduce this on master but not on the branch used in the linked pr. So hopefully this will take care of this issue. I'll let the build complete and verify that is succeeds, and it did ✔️

[danbev]

Closing as #40518 has landed.