Openembedded Core Discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>
To: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
Cc: OE-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: Should systemd be marked as incompatible with musl?
Date: Wed, 29 May 2019 13:29:34 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20190529102934.GA13958@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMKF1sp8tzV=5y8p=s4A0gwH4NpaW7MDF-Gbbon-QrUJrbgChw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 11:01:51AM +0200, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 9:31 AM Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de> wrote:
>...
> > And all these compile errors with musl due to header order are a real WTF,
> > every other library (not limited to C libraries) is now doing headers
> > properly so that any order works. No fun in supporting a broken design.
> 
> I think these are concerns you must raise in musl community, OE is
> downstream where we can experiment but not fix these problems, thy
> should
> be fixed in repsective upstreams as much as possible
> upsttream might have answers or might benefit from this feedback

This doesn't work when the root cause is an intentional design decision
by upstream, and everyone bringing up such a topic again will just be
considered annoying.

Just like asking musl upstream for a __MUSL__ define would not be 
successful, but would be required e.g. for making the musl patch
in webkitgtk upstreamable.

>...
> > > A few pragmatic patches applied by OE would go a long way to bridging
> > > the conflicting goals of the two upstream projects. It's basically the
> > > approach we've taken already - the question is just one of improving
> > > the patches we already have (and maybe patching musl to add missing
> > > functionality instead of only trying to patch systemd to not depend on
> > > it).
> >
> > I already tried patching musl in OE.
> > The change got reverted.
> 
> Its costly to change fundamental APIs in libc which are not accepted
> upstream, especially in libc which will
> go into SDKs and will become default API set solely provided by
> OE thats a huge cost in time.

A macro in a header does not change the ABI or fundamental APIs.

> I suggested
> you to submit the patch upstream musl, I still encourage you to do so.
>...

This was a dead end - musl upstream thinks that software shouldn't  
be doing "loop on EINTR".

At that point the only realistic options are to either patch 
TEMP_FAILURE_RETRY once into musl, or to patch it into all
current and future users.

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed



  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-29 10:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-23 10:33 Should systemd be marked as incompatible with musl? Adrian Bunk
2019-05-23 12:22 ` Burton, Ross
2019-05-24  1:45   ` ChenQi
2019-05-24  2:16     ` Khem Raj
2019-05-24 10:12       ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-24 16:13         ` Khem Raj
2019-05-24 17:27           ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-24 17:31             ` Khem Raj
2019-05-24 17:58               ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-24 18:04                 ` Khem Raj
2019-05-24 18:45                   ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-24 19:34                     ` Andre McCurdy
2019-05-24 19:47                       ` Khem Raj
2019-05-24 20:28                       ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-24 22:25                         ` Andre McCurdy
2019-05-25  7:25                           ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-28 23:10                             ` Andre McCurdy
2019-05-29  7:31                               ` Adrian Bunk
2019-05-29  9:01                                 ` Khem Raj
2019-05-29 10:29                                   ` Adrian Bunk [this message]
2019-05-29 19:04                                 ` Andre McCurdy

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=20190529102934.GA13958@localhost \
    --to=bunk@stusta.de \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=raj.khem@gmail.com \
    /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