On Mon, Apr 24, 2023 at 6:30 AM Jose Quaresma <quaresma.j...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfi...@gmail.com> escreveu no dia domingo, 23/04/2023 > à(s) 20:55: >> >> On Sat, Apr 22, 2023 at 9:06 AM Christoph Lauer >> <christoph.la...@email.de> wrote: >> > >> > Am 21.04.23 um 22:28 schrieb Bruce Ashfield: >> > > On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 11:03 PM Bruce Ashfield via >> > > lists.openembedded.org >> > > <bruce.ashfield=gmail....@lists.openembedded.org> wrote: >> > >> >> > >> On Wed, Apr 19, 2023 at 6:54 PM Richard Purdie >> > >> <richard.pur...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >> > >>> >> > >>> On Wed, 2023-04-19 at 23:34 +0100, Jose Quaresma wrote: >> > >>>> Hi, >> > >>>> >> > >>>> Not related with the previous discussion but just for >> > >>>> your information. >> > >>>> The rm_work.bbclass has an exception for the kernel recipes [1]. >> > >>>> So I don't understand why we can't do the same for the make-mod- >> > >>>> scripts >> > >>>> who is the twin brother of all these kernel recipes. >> > >>>> >> > >>>> [1] >> > >>>> https://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core/tree/meta/classes/rm_work.bbclass#n168 >> > >>> >> > >>> Ideally we wouldn't be doing this for the kernel recipes. >> > >>> >> > >>> There is also a big difference to that and the proposed patch. The >> > >>> proposed patch was preserving a specific directory rather than an >> > >>> entire recipe. Removing the task stamps but leaving a small piece of >> > >>> WORKDIR is quite different to preserving WORKDIR and STAMPS for a >> > >>> specific recipe. The former is not tested and will break things. The >> > >>> latter is better tolerated by bitbake. >> > >> >> > >> Agreed. >> > >> >> > >> Plus, I am working on this now. >> > >> >> > >> I have static linking of the scripts/tools working, but what I haven't >> > >> figured out is how to do that without patching the Makefiles. >> > >> >> > > >> > > It turned out to be quite the battle to get older kernels what was >> > > required for static linking of the tools. >> > > >> > > Attached is my WIP patch. I'm out of the office early next week, but >> > > will revisit it once I'm back. >> > > >> > > Bruce >> > > >> > >> Next up will be some rpath trickery. >> > >> >> > >> Bruce >> > >> >> > >>> >> > >>> So yes, we could do the same. I'm sure there will be other recipes >> > >>> people want to preserve for other reasons. Where do we draw the line? >> > >>> We could preserve everything and drop rm_work, then we wouldn't have >> > >>> these problems? :) >> > >>> >> > >>> Cheers, >> > >>> >> > >>> Richard >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> -- >> > >> - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await >> > >> thee at its end >> > >> - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > > >> > > >> > >> > Thank you for your work, I see you put some time and effort into it. >> > HOSTPKG_CONFIG is, as you mentioned, available since kernel version 5.19 >> >> Yes, I realize that and documented it in the patch ... but I also >> tested on pre-5.19 kernels and what I have in the patch works. Did it >> not work in your testing ? > > > I will test the patch on a couple of kernel versions with some of them > pre-5.19 > but all in 5 major versions. > I will say something about my results later this week.
5.15-stable also has the pkg-config changes Bruce > > Thanks for working on this one. > > Jose > >> >> >> > (see kernel patch [1]), so we need a way to call 'pkg-config --static' >> > with pre-5.19 kernels. A way without modifying the Makefile would be to >> > modify openssls pkg-config in recipe-sysroot-native of make-mod-script, >> > so 'pkg-config --libs' actually shows the dependencies of 'pkg-config >> > --static --libs', but it's a bit hacky. >> >> Already considered, and discarded. That's not going to fly. >> >> > >> > Also fully-static executables still need the same glibc during runtime >> > that they were built with, which makes them error-prone and is generally >> > discouraged. As an alternative, we could build dynamic executables that >> > use the static libcrypto library. The linker links by default against >> > the shared library, so we could remove them from recipe-sysroot-native >> > to force linking against the static library (again, somewhat hacky). >> >> Also considered and discarded. >> >> As do the dynamically linked ones for the c runtime. We aren't talking >> about using these outside of a single build and they are generated on >> the fly, so again, there's very little concern about runtimes changing >> after linking.. There's less risk in static than in the alternatives. >> >> Bruce >> >> >> > >> > [1] >> > https://github.com/torvalds/linux/commit/d5ea4fece4508bf8e72b659cd22fa4840d8d61e5 >> >> >> >> -- >> - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await >> thee at its end >> - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II > > > > -- > Best regards, > > José Quaresma -- - Thou shalt not follow the NULL pointer, for chaos and madness await thee at its end - "Use the force Harry" - Gandalf, Star Trek II
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#180364): https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/message/180364 Mute This Topic: https://lists.openembedded.org/mt/98296212/21656 Group Owner: openembedded-core+ow...@lists.openembedded.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.openembedded.org/g/openembedded-core/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
