From: Thomas Petazzoni <thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH 4/4] systemd: uclibc now has posix_fallocate()
Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2013 20:58:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131209205805.0b034205@skate> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAAXf6LUe+MGnAGtO2yGJPQWb9HxjHwgeMEdFM9TR7f9LmaLN=g@mail.gmail.com>
Thomas, Shawn,
On Mon, 9 Dec 2013 09:27:48 +0100, Thomas De Schampheleire wrote:
> This clearly requires a toolchain with a sufficiently recent uClibc.
> I'm not familiar with our strategy here, so I'm adding ThomasP to this
> thread...
My current strategy is to finish reviewing the eudev/systemd patches
from Eric, and get them merged. They upgrade systemd, and make it
depend on glibc, since it uses many glibc-isms.
If people are unhappy with systemd being only available on uclibc
systems, then they should either:
1/ Improve uClibc so that it provides the necessary glibc-isms, and
make sure that the uClibc project is sufficiently alive to provide
releases at a decent frequency (which it has failed to do for the last
few years). I personally consider the uClibc project as mostly dead,
and the best thing I'm wishing for this project is that a fork is
made, with a more active and reactive community.
2/ Convince systemd upstream to not use the problematic glibc-isms,
but I wish them good luck, knowing how upstream considers any system
that isn't Linux/glibc.
3/ Realize that when you use systemd, you are already using heavy and
fat dependencies (think D-Bus and Glib), and that therefore you can
just as well afford the size of glibc.
In the mean time, if people want to fix systemd 44, then uClibc
compatibility patches should not be *removed* but instead *improved*.
For example, this posix_fallocate() patch should be replaced by a test
in configure.ac, that tests whether the C library does or does not
provide posix_fallocate(), and acts accordingly. That's the good way of
fixing the problem, because it would support both uClibc toolchains
that use official uClibc releases (and therefore don't provide
posix_fallocate()) and uClibc toolchains generated by Buildroot (that
provide posix_fallocate()).
Best regards,
Thomas
--
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-09 19:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-09 0:07 [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/4] mention nconfig Shawn Landden
2013-12-09 0:07 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 2/4] util-linux: nsenter Shawn Landden
2013-12-09 8:33 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-12-09 0:07 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 3/4] systemd does not require glib Shawn Landden
2013-12-09 8:21 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-12-09 8:34 ` Peter Korsgaard
2013-12-09 0:07 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 4/4] systemd: uclibc now has posix_fallocate() Shawn Landden
2013-12-09 8:27 ` Thomas De Schampheleire
2013-12-09 19:58 ` Thomas Petazzoni [this message]
2014-03-03 20:21 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2013-12-09 8:20 ` [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/4] mention nconfig Peter Korsgaard
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131209205805.0b034205@skate \
--to=thomas.petazzoni@free-electrons.com \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox