Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/ltrace: fix musl build

[Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org>]

Hello Fabrice,

On Sat, 4 Nov 2023 18:41:42 +0100
Thomas Petazzoni via buildroot <buildroot@buildroot.org> wrote:

> Doesn't that defeat the purpose of the Upstream: flag entirely? Isn't
> the idea precisely to strongly encourage (not to say "require") that
> patches be sent upstream?

There has still been no feedback from you on this, so I looked into
this a bit more, and it's messy.

ltrace.org points to https://gitlab.com/cespedes/ltrace as being the
Git repo, and this Git repo has changes from a year ago, but absolutely
no tags.

On the other side, Buildroot uses https://github.com/dkogan/ltrace/tree/master
as the upstream... which hasn't seen any commit for the last 8 years.
Though this one has tags, including a 0.7.3 tag, which it the latest
version according to ltrace.org.

And when trying to figure if one if a fork from the other... it's not
clear.

Regarding your patch, you made the inclusion of <error.h> conditional
on __GLIBC__, but what if the code is using functions from <error.h>?
If it builds without <error.h>, then presumably it means the code is no
longer using any function from <error.h>, and those includes can be
dropped?

Alpine had a different patch, that adds a configure.ac check for
<error.h>: https://git.alpinelinux.org/aports/plain/main/ltrace/musl.patch

However, their patch is for 0.7.3, while we use the "latest" commit
from master.

So overall, quite messy stuff, so I decided to mark ltrace as
unavailable for musl:

  https://gitlab.com/buildroot.org/buildroot/-/commit/859bd545821a838454577c4c1c9106837cda51cb

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, co-owner and CEO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering and training
https://bootlin.com
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot