>>> For FreeBSD 10 we have changed /usr/lib/libc.so to be a text linker >>> script and no longer a symlink. This breaks the config check on i386 for >>> what binary format to use when building with ASM support. The current >>> config check expects /usr/lib/libc.so to symlink to a /usr/lib/libc.so.X >>> file to run file(1) against. For FreeBSD the real libc.so is in >>> /lib/libc.so.X. >>> >>> Because the proper libc.so is not found, a.out format is chosen when >>> using ASM and the build fails. >>> >>> With patch: >>> Operating system: i386-pc-freebsd8.3 >>> Configuring for BSD-x86-elf >>> [...] >>> Build passes. >>> >>> >>> I have 2 proposed patches which solve the problem. Only 1 is needed. >>> >>> 1. Use file(1) against /bin/sh for all BSD platforms. I believe this >>> will be more portable long-term. It will determine the binary type, >>> regardless of where libc.so is or how it is setup. Note that -L is used >>> to follow symlink incase someone symlinks /bin/sh to something else. >>> >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~bdrewery/openssl-ldscript-elf-bin-sh.diff >>> >>> 2. Or just include /lib/libc.so.* in the search path to run file(1) >>> against. I prefer #1 as it is possible that /usr/lib/libc.so is >>> symlinked to a libc.ld script, which cause file(1) to return 'ASCII' and >>> the config falls back on a.out. >>> >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~bdrewery/openssl-ldscript-elf-lib-libc.diff >> We have to remember that those lines serve several BSD flavours and >> preferred choice should be least invasive,
Applied. Thanks for report. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [email protected] Automated List Manager [email protected]
