Hi, 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, Jaco