Date: Sun, 17 Jun 2012 19:33:26 +0200 From: Bruno Haible <bruno@...sp.org> To: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx>, musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: installation without root privileges Hi, When installing musl-0.9.1 according to the recipe of INSTALL, Option 1, CC="gcc-32" \ ./configure --prefix=/arch/x86-linux/inst-musl \ --exec-prefix=/arch/x86-linux/inst-musl \ --target=i686-unknown-linux-gnu \ CC="gcc-32" the "make install" ends like this: ... install -D -m 644 include/wctype.h /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/include/wctype.h install -D -m 644 include/wordexp.h /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/include/wordexp.h install -D tools/musl-gcc /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/bin/musl-gcc ln -sf /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/lib/libc.so /lib/ld-musl-i386.so.1 || true ln: could not create symbolic link „/lib/ld-musl-i386.so.1“: Permission denied But the /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/lib/musl-gcc.specs, section *link, contains a reference to the file /lib/ld-musl-i386.so.1 that could not be installed. My solution was to change this to read: *link: %(old_link) -dynamic-linker /arch/x86-linux/inst-musl/lib/libc.so -nostdlib Suggestion: When --disable-gcc-wrapper is not passed to configure (this is what distinguishes "Option 1" from "Option 2", right?), don't even attempt to put a symlink into /lib. Simply always put the libc.so's real filename into the *link section of musl-gcc.specs. The drawback is that executables built with musl can typically not be transferred to a different machine (because that machine will likely use a different installation directory for musl). Bruno
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.