Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 21:35:57 +0530 From: Weldon Goree <weldon@...gurwallah.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: A running list of questions from "porting" Slackware to musl On 09/30/2014 09:16 PM, Rich Felker wrote: > > Like glibc, musl supports the gettext API natively. There is no need > for libintl and it should not be installed. libintl.h is just the > header for the gettext API. > > I'm not sure what's happening with symbol names in your libintl. I > suspect it was either built incorrectly or has some invalid glibc > assumptions, but I know other users (even Alpine Linux) have used it > successfully with musl in the past, before musl had gettext. > Nor I, but I've tried it with all the permutations of older gettext versions and no gettext versions, and several GNU programs fail to link if they aren't told to --disable-nls. I'm not a programmer, just a sysadmin, and I'm interested in musl because it might make my life easier in the future, but I'm in no place (yet) to figure out what I've done wrong. > I don't think gcc/ld search /lib when linking, so putting libc.so > there (and not having it in /usr/lib) would probably leave things > broken. If the core issue is that you want the actual file on /, you > could swap the direction of the symlink (make ld-musl the real file) > or make both ld-musl and /usr/lib/libc.so symlinks to /lib/libc.so or > similar. > When I cross-compile a native gcc it "wants" the linker to be in /lib (or I should say, Gregor's patches tell it to look for the symlink in /lib, and my being a sysadmin tells me that whatever /lib/ld-foo links to should not be in /usr because I do have to boot my server occasionally). > > If you're "porting" the whole system to build against musl, you > shouldn't need the musl-gcc wrapper, and in fact you're going to have > a hard time using it as soon as you try to build C++ software. You > really want a native compiler toolchain that supports musl. See the > musl-cross project for the necessary patches to GCC. Granted: my slackware port doesn't use musl-gcc, but I'm maintaining the community port of musl for slackware-gnu users too. > >> 4. Is Pth a lost cause? > > Yes. But there's a new portable pth (sorry, couldn't resist) in the > works that several projects (iirc gnupg) are eagar to switch to, since > pth is so bad and has no future (it's incompatible with programs that > use real threads, and likely with most/all future systems). It's > API-compatible but based on pthread so it works anywhere. No idea what > the status is, though. > I'll look into it. xorg was happy with the stub lib they wrote years ago so I haven't looked past that because it did what I needed; that was more out of curiosity. > > I'd need more context to know what, if anything, you're doing wrong, > or if the packages you're compiling just insist on using stack > protector. In any case having it on should not break anything, but you > may need libssp_nonshared.a (from a gcc natively targeting musl) for > ssp to link right in shared libraries. libssp.so should not exist, and > libssp.a should be an empty .a file (ar rc libssp.a to make it). > RPM is the candidate this time; I only need it to build rpm2cpio to get the linuxdoc sources (I found a workaround), but it also took some finagling to get Perl to stop "helping" me by adding -f-stack-protector. This was again a point of curiosity. Cheers, Weldon
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.