Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 01/11] package/libselinux: fix build issues caused by 3.8.1 bump

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

On Fri, 19 Sep 2025 20:42:30 +0200
Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org> wrote:

> > Dammit. I must say I don't quite grasp what they are trying to do in
> > these matchpathcon.c checks.
> > 
> > It seems like:
> > 
> > #if (defined(_FILE_OFFSET_BITS) && _FILE_OFFSET_BITS == 64) && defined(__INO64_T_TYPE) && !defined(__INO_T_MATCHES_INO64_T)
> > /* alias defined in the public header but we undefine it here */
> > #undef matchpathcon_filespec_add
> > 
> > /* ABI backwards-compatible shim for non-LFS 32-bit systems */
> > 
> > static_assert(sizeof(unsigned long) == sizeof(__ino_t), "inode size mismatch");
> > static_assert(sizeof(unsigned long) == sizeof(uint32_t), "inode size mismatch");
> > static_assert(sizeof(ino_t) == sizeof(ino64_t), "inode size mismatch");
> > static_assert(sizeof(ino64_t) == sizeof(uint64_t), "inode size mismatch");
> > 
> > is for 32-bit systems? And here you are building for x86-64, but it
> > gets detected as a 32-bit system, or something like that. Is it due to
> > the fact that we always build with _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 even on 64-bit
> > systems, where I guess it doesn't make sense because off_t is anyway
> > going to always be 64-bit.  
> 
> So would the right fix to enable _FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 only for
> 32-bit systems? Or do you think something in uClibc-ng is wrong?

Defining FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64 all the time works fine with everything
but uClibc-ng, so I'm tempted to think that something else is wrong in
uClibc-ng, but I'm not 100% sure.

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