[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Alexander Khryukin]

Hello.
I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
and faced with error

util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory

Does anybody have any solution?

My config: http://pastie.org/5142303
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20121031/344de3af/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Alexander,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> and faced with error
> 
> util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory

glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.

> Does anybody have any solution?

This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Alexander Khryukin]

? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:41 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> Hi Alexander,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > and faced with error
> > 
> > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> 
> glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
> http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.
> 
> > Does anybody have any solution?
> 
> This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> 
> baruch
> 


Hi, thanks for answer.
I compiled toolchain via crosstool-ng


[me at kvm-host crosstool-ng-linaro]$ find . -name rpc.h
./.build/src/gcc-linaro-4.7-2012.09/fixincludes/tests/base/rpc/rpc.h
./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/sunrpc/rpc/rpc.h
./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/include/rpc/rpc.h


Seems to be rpc.h headers exist in glibc dir
but buildroot not understand it.

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Yann E. MORIN]

Alexander, All,

On Wednesday 31 October 2012 12:56:26 Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> ? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:41 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> > Hi Alexander,
> > 
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > > and faced with error
> > > 
> > > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> > 
> > glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.
> > 
> > > Does anybody have any solution?
> > 
> > This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> > glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> > 
> > baruch

> Hi, thanks for answer.
> I compiled toolchain via crosstool-ng
> 
> 
> [me at kvm-host crosstool-ng-linaro]$ find . -name rpc.h
> ./.build/src/gcc-linaro-4.7-2012.09/fixincludes/tests/base/rpc/rpc.h
> ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/sunrpc/rpc/rpc.h
> ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/include/rpc/rpc.h
> 
> Seems to be rpc.h headers exist in glibc dir
> but buildroot not understand it.

As Baruch said, it's because glibc-2.14 (and above) do *not* *install* the
rpc headers. What you point at is the *source* tree of glibc (and gcc, but
that's irrelevant). When you *run* the toolchain, those are *not* the
locations searched for; the headers are looked for in the *sysroot* of the
toolchain, which you can find as a second-level sub-directory in the prefix
you installed the toolchain in.

So, Baruch is right: either downgrade your toolchain to use glibc-2.13,
or try to use TIRPC. As TIRPC is not yet, AFAIK, at par with glibc's
implementation, the only sane option so far *is* to downgrade your glibc.

You can of course also search the archives of the buildroot mailing list,
there are a lot of such reports, and each time the same explanations were
re-hashed again and again.

Also, search the Internet (eg. with google and these keywords: glibc rpc
not available, there are literally *tons* of answers; also, search on
LWN.net, they've had quite a few very good articles on the sunject).

And no, switching to using eglibc instead will not fix it. Neither will
updating to a newer version (although I think glibc-2.16 did restore this,
but it's not available from ct-ng, by lack of interest it seems, as nobody
did feel necessary to post any patch to add latest glibc in ct-ng).

;-)

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +0/33 662376056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |   ^                |
| --==< O_o >==-- '------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  /e\  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | (*_*) | / \ HTML MAIL    |  """  conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------'-------'------------------'--------------------'

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Alexander,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:56:26PM +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> ? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:41 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> > Hi Alexander,
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > > and faced with error
> > > 
> > > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> > 
> > glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.
> > 
> > > Does anybody have any solution?
> > 
> > This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> > glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> 
> Hi, thanks for answer.
> I compiled toolchain via crosstool-ng
> 
> [me at kvm-host crosstool-ng-linaro]$ find . -name rpc.h
> ./.build/src/gcc-linaro-4.7-2012.09/fixincludes/tests/base/rpc/rpc.h
> ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/sunrpc/rpc/rpc.h
> ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/include/rpc/rpc.h

I any of these the standard include path?

> Seems to be rpc.h headers exist in glibc dir
> but buildroot not understand it.

glibc 2.14 still includes run-time RPC support. Only build time support has 
been removed. This might be the reason you have these headers. However, if 
these headers are not in the standard includes search path, they are not 
visible to the code you build with this toolchain.

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Alexander Khryukin]

? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:13 +0100, Yann E. MORIN ?????:
> Alexander, All,
> 
> On Wednesday 31 October 2012 12:56:26 Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > ? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:41 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> > > Hi Alexander,
> > > 
> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > > > and faced with error
> > > > 
> > > > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> > > 
> > > glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
> > > http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.
> > > 
> > > > Does anybody have any solution?
> > > 
> > > This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> > > glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> > > 
> > > baruch
> 
> > Hi, thanks for answer.
> > I compiled toolchain via crosstool-ng
> > 
> > 
> > [me at kvm-host crosstool-ng-linaro]$ find . -name rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/gcc-linaro-4.7-2012.09/fixincludes/tests/base/rpc/rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/sunrpc/rpc/rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/include/rpc/rpc.h
> > 
> > Seems to be rpc.h headers exist in glibc dir
> > but buildroot not understand it.
> 
> As Baruch said, it's because glibc-2.14 (and above) do *not* *install* the
> rpc headers. What you point at is the *source* tree of glibc (and gcc, but
> that's irrelevant). When you *run* the toolchain, those are *not* the
> locations searched for; the headers are looked for in the *sysroot* of the
> toolchain, which you can find as a second-level sub-directory in the prefix
> you installed the toolchain in.
> 
> So, Baruch is right: either downgrade your toolchain to use glibc-2.13,
> or try to use TIRPC. As TIRPC is not yet, AFAIK, at par with glibc's
> implementation, the only sane option so far *is* to downgrade your glibc.
> 
> You can of course also search the archives of the buildroot mailing list,
> there are a lot of such reports, and each time the same explanations were
> re-hashed again and again.
> 
> Also, search the Internet (eg. with google and these keywords: glibc rpc
> not available, there are literally *tons* of answers; also, search on
> LWN.net, they've had quite a few very good articles on the sunject).
> 
> And no, switching to using eglibc instead will not fix it. Neither will
> updating to a newer version (although I think glibc-2.16 did restore this,
> but it's not available from ct-ng, by lack of interest it seems, as nobody
> did feel necessary to post any patch to add latest glibc in ct-ng).
> 
> ;-)
> 
> Regards,
> Yann E. MORIN.


Hm, i'm prepared little patch for glibc package
that updates glibc to 2.16.0 in buildroot
but rpc.h still not included.

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Alexander Khryukin]

? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 14:13 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> Hi Alexander,
> 
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:56:26PM +0400, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > ? ??., 31/10/2012 ? 13:41 +0200, Baruch Siach ?????:
> > > Hi Alexander,
> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 02:32:08PM +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > > > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > > > and faced with error
> > > > 
> > > > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> > > 
> > > glibc version newer than 2.13 omits built time support for RPC. See 
> > > http://sourceware.org/ml/crossgcc/2011-09/msg00005.html.
> > > 
> > > > Does anybody have any solution?
> > > 
> > > This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> > > glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> > 
> > Hi, thanks for answer.
> > I compiled toolchain via crosstool-ng
> > 
> > [me at kvm-host crosstool-ng-linaro]$ find . -name rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/gcc-linaro-4.7-2012.09/fixincludes/tests/base/rpc/rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/sunrpc/rpc/rpc.h
> > ./.build/src/glibc-2.14.1/include/rpc/rpc.h
> 
> I any of these the standard include path?
> 
> > Seems to be rpc.h headers exist in glibc dir
> > but buildroot not understand it.
> 
> glibc 2.14 still includes run-time RPC support. Only build time support has 
> been removed. This might be the reason you have these headers. However, if 
> these headers are not in the standard includes search path, they are not 
> visible to the code you build with this toolchain.
> 
> baruch
> 


>that updates glibc to 2.16.0 in buildroot

I mean ct-ng of course

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Thomas Petazzoni]

On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:41:18 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:

> > Does anybody have any solution?
> 
> This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.

I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc when
the toolchain does not provide RPC support.

I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Thomas,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:31:01PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:41:18 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > Does anybody have any solution?
> > 
> > This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> > glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> 
> I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
> Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
> glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc when
> the toolchain does not provide RPC support.
> 
> I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
> Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.

Well, this only solves the problem for internal toolchains, isn't it?

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Gustavo Zacarias]

On 10/31/12 11:52, Baruch Siach wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:31:01PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:41:18 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
>>>> Does anybody have any solution?
>>>
>>> This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
>>> glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
>>
>> I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
>> Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
>> glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc when
>> the toolchain does not provide RPC support.
>>
>> I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
>> Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.
> 
> Well, this only solves the problem for internal toolchains, isn't it?
> 
> baruch

Internal toolchains are just uClibc, and only glibc/eglibc are affected,
so no, quite the opposite.
Regards.

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Baruch Siach]

Hi Gustavo,

On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote:
> On 10/31/12 11:52, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:31:01PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:41:18 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> >>>> Does anybody have any solution?
> >>>
> >>> This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain with 2.13 
> >>> glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> >>
> >> I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
> >> Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
> >> glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc when
> >> the toolchain does not provide RPC support.
> >>
> >> I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
> >> Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.
> > 
> > Well, this only solves the problem for internal toolchains, isn't it?
> 
> Internal toolchains are just uClibc, and only glibc/eglibc are affected,
> so no, quite the opposite.

Ah, of course. You're right.

baruch

-- 
     http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open Systems
=}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
   - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Alexander Khryukin]

2012/10/31 Baruch Siach <baruch@tkos.co.il>

> Hi Gustavo,
>
> On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 11:58:45AM -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote:
> > On 10/31/12 11:52, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:31:01PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 13:41:18 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:
> > >>>> Does anybody have any solution?
> > >>>
> > >>> This is a toolchain level problem. Either downgrade to a toolchain
> with 2.13
> > >>> glibc, or use a toolchain with tirpc.
> > >>
> > >> I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
> > >> Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
> > >> glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc
> when
> > >> the toolchain does not provide RPC support.
> > >>
> > >> I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
> > >> Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.
> > >
> > > Well, this only solves the problem for internal toolchains, isn't it?
> >
> > Internal toolchains are just uClibc, and only glibc/eglibc are affected,
> > so no, quite the opposite.
>
> Ah, of course. You're right.
>
> baruch
>
> --
>      http://baruch.siach.name/blog/                  ~. .~   Tk Open
> Systems
> =}------------------------------------------------ooO--U--Ooo------------{=
>    - baruch at tkos.co.il - tel: +972.2.679.5364, http://www.tkos.co.il -
> _______________________________________________
> buildroot mailing list
> buildroot at busybox.net
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
>


MIght you can share your patch?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/attachments/20121031/12f7018a/attachment.html>

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Yann E. MORIN]

Alexander, All,

On Wednesday 31 October 2012 Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > > > On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 03:31:01PM +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> > > >> I have posted a patch set some time ago that fixes this. It tells
> > > >> Buildroot whether the toolchain has RPC support or not (even for
> > > >> glibc/eglibc toolchains), and then is capable of building libtirpc
> > when
> > > >> the toolchain does not provide RPC support.
[--SNIP--]
> MIght you can share your patch?

Search the archives, the patchset was posted to the list.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Paul Chavent]

Hello

On 10/31/2012 12:32 PM, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> Hello.
> I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> and faced with error
>
> util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
>
> Does anybody have any solution?
>

I add the --enable-obsolete-rpc to the eglibc configure options.

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Yann E. MORIN]

Paul, All,

On Wednesday 31 October 2012 Paul Chavent wrote:
> On 10/31/2012 12:32 PM, Alexander Khryukin wrote:
> > I'm trying to build busybox with glibc
> > and faced with error
> > util-linux/mount.c:140:22: fatal error: rpc/rpc.h: No such file or directory
> > Does anybody have any solution?
> 
> I add the --enable-obsolete-rpc to the eglibc configure options.

That works only with glibc-2.16 or later (ditto for eglibc), but
Alexander is using 2.14.

Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.

-- 
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
|  Yann E. MORIN  | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software  Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN     |  ___               |
| +33 223 225 172 `------------.-------:  X  AGAINST      |  \e/  There is no  |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL    |   v   conspiracy.  |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Baruch Siach,

On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 16:52:49 +0200, Baruch Siach wrote:

> > I intend to adjust a few things and update it, before resending it.
> > Maybe before the Buildroot meeting this week-end, maybe after.
> 
> Well, this only solves the problem for internal toolchains, isn't it?

No, the intention is to solve the problem for glibc/eglibc toolchains.
The existing support for glibc/eglibc toolchains (both the external
toolchain support and the crosstool-ng backend) assume that if the C
library is glibc or eglibc, then the C library *always* has RPC
support. Starting (e)glibc 2.14 this is no longer correct, so my patch
set takes this into account at the Buildroot level.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com

[Buildroot] RPC.h and busybox

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Dear Alexander Khryukin,

On Wed, 31 Oct 2012 18:28:27 +0300, Alexander Khryukin wrote:

> MIght you can share your patch?

Sure. However note that it is still a preliminary version, and I intend
to make some more changes to it before asking for it to be merged.

See:
http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/buildroot/2012-August/057230.html.

Note that those patches are 2+ months old, so you will have so work to
do to be able to apply them.

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com