From: Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/openssl: fix build on riscv32
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:34:15 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210303103415.GL2275@scaer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <878s74lnhs.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk>
Peter, All,
On 2021-03-03 08:12 +0100, Peter Korsgaard spake thusly:
> >>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> writes:
>
> > riscv32 is (surprise!) a 32-bit architecture. But it has been 2038-safe
> > from its inception. As such, there is no legacy binaries that may use
> > the 32-bit time syscalls, and thus they are anot available on riscv32.
>
> > Code tht directly calls to the syscalls without using the C libraries
> > wrappers thus need to handle this case by themselves.
>
> > Backport a patch from the upstream development branch that will
> > eventually be openssl 3.0, but has not yet been backported to the 1.1.1
> > stable branch.
>
> > Fixes:
> > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/eb9/eb9a64d4ffae8569b5225083f282cf87ffa7c681/
> > ...
> > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/07e/07e413b24ba8adc9558c80267ce16dda339bf032/
>
> > Signed-off-by: Yann E. MORIN <yann.morin.1998@free.fr>
> > Cc: Matt Weber <matthew.weber@rockwellcollins.com>
> > Cc: Mark Corbin <mark@dibsco.co.uk>
>
> Did you see Arndbs comment on the upstream commit?
>
> https://github.com/openssl/openssl/commit/5b5e2985f355c8e99c196d9ce5d02c15bebadfbc
>
> I cannot quite figure out if this causes issues for other archs?
Indeed, in light of the comment by Arnd, this patch looks a bit fishy.
Thus, I've now reverted it.
However, what should we do now?
The failing engine is not optional; it is always built (i.e. we can't
make BR2_PACKAGE_LIBOPENSSL_ENGINES depends on !riscv32).
A quick solution is to make libopenssl depends on !riscv32. This is not
very satisfying, especially because of BR2_PACKAGE_OPENSSL_FORCE_LIBOPENSSL
to which we should propagate the dependency; that's 5 packages: hostapd,
ibm-sw-tpm2, softether, tpm2-tss, wpa_suplicant (for mesh networking and
for wpa3), so not totally unfesasible either, but still... :-/
Thoughts?
Regards,
Yann E. MORIN.
--
.-----------------.--------------------.------------------.--------------------.
| Yann E. MORIN | Real-Time Embedded | /"\ ASCII RIBBON | Erics' conspiracy: |
| +33 662 376 056 | Software Designer | \ / CAMPAIGN | ___ |
| +33 561 099 427 `------------.-------: X AGAINST | \e/ There is no |
| http://ymorin.is-a-geek.org/ | _/*\_ | / \ HTML MAIL | v conspiracy. |
'------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'
prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-03-03 10:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-03-02 21:51 [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/openssl: fix build on riscv32 Yann E. MORIN
2021-03-02 22:58 ` Arnout Vandecappelle
2021-03-03 7:12 ` Peter Korsgaard
2021-03-03 10:34 ` Yann E. MORIN [this message]
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=20210303103415.GL2275@scaer \
--to=yann.morin.1998@free.fr \
--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