Date: Mon, 1 Jun 2015 12:03:44 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] build: overhaul wrapper script system for multiple wrapper support On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 05:39:46PM +0200, Shiz wrote: > > On 01 Jun 2015, at 16:47, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote: > > > > There are two reasons I prefer the approach I described: > > > > 1. It's better not to auto-enable wrappers unless we're pretty > > confident they work. The wrappers are not magically universal; they're > > a way to use musl with a preexisting non-musl-targeted toolchain that > > meets a fairly large set of internal assumptions, and they won't > > necessarily work with arbitrary toolchains. In particular I'm pretty > > sure musl-gcc does not work with Rob's toolchains from Aboriginal > > Linux that are using their own wrapper (named gcc) around an internal > > gcc elsewhere, and presumably (being uclibc based) these would even be > > detected as "ok for wrapper”. > > I’d like to note that a __GLIBC__ check would not help here either > presumably, as uclibc defines __GLIBC__ as well. :) Yes, that's what I was trying to say. > So I see your use case for testing in C code itself as opposed to testing > compiler features. That being said, I’m still not at all a fan of __GLIBC__, > for reasons mentioned in the previous post. While a false-positive is worse > than a false-negative, I feel just solely testing for this provides a large > opportunity for false-negatives, and even some false positives as you yourself > mentioned in point one. I'm not aware of any real-world false-negatives. A Bionic-based system would probably be one, if any such system with a compiler toolchain exists, but depending on the properties of the toolchain that might even be a proper negative rather than a false-negative, so I'd actually prefer to research whether the wrappers work for such Bionic-based toolchains and then enable them explicitly if they do, rather than just assuming they work. > It’s a tough thing to check thoroughly and accurately, but I do not think > checking __GLIBC__ is at all the solution either. Still open to more options. 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.