On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:29:02PM +0200, Michael Olbrich wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 12:30:41PM +0200, Ladislav Michl wrote:
> > Hi there!
> >
> >
> > PTXCONF_GLIBC_VERSION is used for check for specific toolchain. However
> > when left
> > blank, compilation fails with:
> > ---------------------------
> > target: glibc.targetinstall
> > ---------------------------
> >
> > ptxdist: error: ptxd_make_xpkg_init: please define <PKG>_VERSION
> > ptxdist/rules/glibc.make:30: recipe for target 'glibc.targetinstall' failed
> >
> > shouldn't we get libc version from toolchain in this case?
>
> No. Reproducibility is one of the main goals of PTXdist. What we should
> actually do is check if PTXCONF_GLIBC_VERSION matches the actual glibc
> version, like we do for gcc.
Agree, but we are already selecting toolchains, which gives a clue about
glibc used. For gcclibs code reads:
ifeq ($(shell which $(CROSS_CC) 2>/dev/null),)
GCCLIBS_VERSION := unknown
else
GCCLIBS_VERSION := $(shell $(CROSS_CC) -dumpversion)
endif
and GCC version is verified earlier in check_compiler(). But leaving
GLIBC_VERSION blank does not make PTXdist complain. Everything is built
and it is targetinstall which fails. That a bit unexpected to me. I would
expect
a) glibc version picked from toolchain or
b) ptxdist bailing out early
when glibc version is not specified. But you already voted for b).
Also using the real glibc version in package name instead of some
random string makes more sense.
> However, I'm not sure, if there is a simple test for that. I see a
> libc-<version>.so in my toolchains, but I\m not sure if that's always
> the case.
usr/bin/ldd from sysroot holds answer as well, also
strings <glibc.so> | grep "version [0-9]" could work.
ladis
--
ptxdist mailing list
ptxdist@pengutronix.de
