From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Peter Seiderer Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 21:04:05 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [autobuild.buildroot.net] Build results for 2018-06-23 In-Reply-To: <20180624060020.55B692079C@mail.bootlin.com> References: <20180624060020.55B692079C@mail.bootlin.com> Message-ID: <20180625210405.3a8d6f8a@gmx.net> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Sun, 24 Jun 2018 08:00:20 +0200 (CEST), Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Hello, > > Build statistics for 2018-06-23 > =============================== [...] > Results for branch 'master' > =========================== > [...] > arm | wiringpi-2.46 | NOK | http://autobuild.buildroot.net/results/a1ca953247475a5f31fe9283ade05c9cba26853b | Related to the version bump to 2.46, now the static build is disabled by the tool author, make static in the wiringPi directory gives the following output: $ cd build/wiringpi-2.46/wiringPi && make static wiringPi is no-longer shipped with the ability to statically link it. Many reasons but the biggest issue is people who have statically linked wiringPi into their product - for example a Pi UPS device or a Tetris-like game and not subsequently shipped their modified sources. These people are no better than common thieves with complete disregard to the conditions of the LGPL that wiringPi ships with. Additionally, many think it's a good idea to statically link wiringPi into their favourite language - like Node, and Java and other itsy bitsy little things. These people have a complete and utter disregard to what happens underneath when e.g. the Linux kernel changes on the Pi then wiringPi stops as it depends on some Pi kernel features, then the poor user get in-touch with me and I've had over 10,000 emails so-far and it's now beyond a joke. DO NOT STATICALLY LINK WIRINGPI. Gordon Henderson, March 2018. What to do? Honour Gordons request and disable wiringPi in buildroot for static builds or patch the wiringPi makefile to re-introduce the static linking? Regards, Peter