So I figured I better write the patch for dahdi-tools against musl ...
so I proceed to download a stage3 tar from
http://distfiles.gentoo.org/experimental/amd64/musl/ (vanilla).

I extract it, and mount --rebind /dev, /proc and /sys, and copy in
/etc/resolve.conf ...

chroot ... and so far so good.

emerge --sync
emerge -uDNav @world.

And this blows up on pam-1.3.1-r2.  Looks like

I've seen mention of a musl overlay?

What's the best way to proceed?

As it stands I can't "make prepare" gentoo-sources (which 4.19.X) is
apparently the newest available for musl profile.  Reports seems to
indicate that this be related to "old linux-headers" (which is at ).

Kind Regards,

On 2020/03/27 07:43, Jaco Kroon wrote:
> 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

Reply via email to