On 2020/03/27 03:25, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 3/23/2020 04:21, Jaco Kroon wrote:
>> Hi,
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/713668 relates.
>>  * Searching for /usr/include/execinfo.h ...
>> sys-libs/glibc-2.29-r7 (/usr/include/execinfo.h)
>> As I see I can either add an explicit depend on glibc which I'd prefer
>> not to.  Or someone from the musl team could possibly assist on how to
>> get the backtrace() set of calls on musl please?
>> Alternatively I need to add a test and simply path debug.c to only
>> provide stub function for print_backtrace(FILE *fp) that just does
>> fprintf(fp, "No backtrace() available to print a backtrace.\n");
>> Suggestions?
>> Kind Regards,
>> Jaco
> Some quick searching on google, it looks like the cleanest fix for that bug
> is dahdi-tools needs to be patched to only include execinfo.h or only use
> backtrace() on glibc-based systems, and that patch then sent to the
> dahdi-tools upstream developers for inclusion in a future release.  That
> way, we're not dragging that patch around forever in the tree or in the musl
> overlay.

Thanks.  I'll see action accordingly.

> It also doesn't look like musl itself will ever implement execinfo.h or
> backtrace(), per this message in 2015 from the lead musl developer:
> https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2015/04/09/3
Implementing libunwind is overkill for my needs, I'll be happy to help
push things upstream if somebody else cares enough to implement.

Kind Regards,

Reply via email to