Date: Sat, 22 Mar 2014 13:42:32 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: i686 with -fPIE and -fstack-protector-all On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 09:33:48AM -0400, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > On 03/22/2014 09:06 AM, Szabolcs Nagy wrote: > >* Anthony G. Basile <basile@...nsource.dyc.edu> [2014-03-22 08:53:07 -0400]: > >>I've hit a bug with 1.0.0 on i686. When building with > >>-fstack-protector-all and -fPIE, I get an undefined reference to > >>`__stack_chk_fail_local'. I do not get this on x86_64: > >> > > > >may be this gcc bug should be in the faq > > > >http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2012-01/msg00012.html > >http://git.alpinelinux.org/cgit/aports/tree/main/musl/__stack_chk_fail_local.c > > > > Thanks it. I was going to adopt a patch like alpines but hesitated > in csae I was missing something. > > Aside: it looks like alpine is hitting a lot of the same issues i am > with gentoo+musl and adopting similar approaches, like getent and > ldconfig. Can ldconfig just be an empty script? Or does it need to make plain .so symlinks to all the .so.X.Y.Z files so that ld can find them? I'm not clear on whether most packages (e.g. libtool based) do the symlink themselves or expect ldconfig to do so. It doesn't affect runtime usage but it does affect linking programs against the library. If we can figure out all this stuff, it would be great if someone could make a clean git repo of replacements for all of the glibc binaries that one could use with musl. Do you (or anyone else) have a list of programs we'd need to make dists happy? Rich
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.