[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160819214207.GC20810@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Aug 2016 18:42:07 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
Cc: Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Petri Gynther <pgynther@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Josh Poimboeuf <jpoimboe@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
"linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools lib: Reinstate strlcpy() header guard with
__UCLIBC__
Em Fri, Aug 19, 2016 at 02:27:58PM -0700, Vineet Gupta escreveu:
> On 08/19/2016 02:10 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> >> But one question: when you test build, do you have any extra devel
> >> > packages installed besides what is in this prebuilt toolchain tarball?
> >> >
> >> > I'll add at least zlib and elfutils to the mix, building it in the
> >> > docker image creation process, and then testing with/without
> >> > NO_LIBELF=1, as I do to other cross-building images:
> > Trying to build elfutils 0.166:
> >
> > checking whether gcc accepts -Wduplicated-cond... no
> > checking whether gcc accepts -Wnull-dereference... no
> > configure: WARNING: "libc does not have argp"
> > checking for argp_parse in -largp... no
> > configure: error: "no libargp found"
> >
> > ----
> >
> > will go errands now, will try to check what is needed to build elfutils
> > with uclibc, ideas?
>
> So back in 3.2 days I ran into these issues with elfutils - the workaround was to
> use the standalone libelf
> http://www.mr511.de/software/libelf-0.8.9.tar.gz.
Ok, so I'll git it a try with libelf, lets see...
> Not sure if you will be willing to take that path.
>
> OTOH, you could use standalone argp @ http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/archive but
> it seems that requires a bunch of patches too - from looking into the
> corresponding buildroot package folder. Give this a shot - otherwise it is easier
> to just build a custom toolchain with pre-req packages from buildroot. Or can be
> provided if you so deem fit !
I tried this path and its not fun :-\
Powered by blists - more mailing lists