From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Yann E. MORIN Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 11:34:15 +0100 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] package/openssl: fix build on riscv32 In-Reply-To: <878s74lnhs.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> References: <20210302215147.1556308-1-yann.morin.1998@free.fr> <878s74lnhs.fsf@dell.be.48ers.dk> Message-ID: <20210303103415.GL2275@scaer> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Peter, All, On 2021-03-03 08:12 +0100, Peter Korsgaard spake thusly: > >>>>> "Yann" == Yann E MORIN 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 > > Cc: Matt Weber > > Cc: Mark Corbin > > 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. | '------------------------------^-------^------------------^--------------------'