Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Yuanjie Huang]

Hi Ross,

Is it recommended practice to remove libtool .la files for oe-core when 
some issue pops? If yes, I would withdraw and prepare a new patch that 
complies with the practice.


Thanks,
Yuanjie

On 09/21/2016 05:01 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:


On 21 September 2016 at 02:46, Yuanjie Huang 
> wrote:


We have some user making use of these libraries directly,
otherwise, cross gcc can link these sanitizer libraries with just
-fsantizer flag without problem. Without .la files, his flow can
not be libtoolized.


libtool works fine without .la files on linux, which is why the 
remove-libtool class works (which can be a distro-level inherit and 
deletes every .la before it reaches the sysroot).


Ross


-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Burton, Ross]

On 21 September 2016 at 02:46, Yuanjie Huang 
wrote:

> We have some user making use of these libraries directly, otherwise, cross
> gcc can link these sanitizer libraries with just -fsantizer flag without
> problem. Without .la files, his flow can not be libtoolized.
>

libtool works fine without .la files on linux, which is why the
remove-libtool class works (which can be a distro-level inherit and deletes
every .la before it reaches the sysroot).

Ross
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Yuanjie Huang]

Thanks, commit message revised.

Best,
Yuanjie

On 09/20/2016 09:35 PM, Burton, Ross wrote:


On 20 September 2016 at 10:19, Yuanjie Huang 
> wrote:


Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [embedded specific]
(LOCAL REV; NOT UPSTREAM) -- sent to oe-core on 2016-09-20


You don't need upstream-status tags in commit messages, only patches 
that the recipe is applying.


Also please remove your internal tracking data from the commit message.

Ross


>From 6ceafbc3a69a0b87bcddf718050c6958baab7759 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Yuanjie Huang 
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 16:36:55 +0800
Subject: [PATCH V2] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

Since libtool sysroot is not set when compiling sanitizers, the libtool
does no prefix the dependency path correctly. Fix it, so that programs
can link to sanitizer libraries without error.

This patch changes the depenedency_libs line in libasan.la and
libusan.la from
	dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl '/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la '/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la'
to
	dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl =/usr/lib/libstdc++.la =/usr/lib/libstdc++.la'

Signed-off-by: Yuanjie Huang 
---
 meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc | 2 ++
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
index c987ccb..5fe5eaf 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ do_install () {
 rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty -p ${D}${infodir}
 fi
 chown -R root:root ${D}
+# Fix broken libtool with stdc++, as sysroot is not set.
+find ${D} -name \*.la -exec sed -i "/^dependency_libs=/s@'/usr/lib'@=/usr/lib@g" {} \;
 }
 
 INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS = "1"
-- 
1.9.1

-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Yuanjie Huang]

On 09/21/2016 04:48 AM, Khem Raj wrote:

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:19 AM, Yuanjie Huang
 wrote:

From: Yuanjie Huang 

Since libtool sysroot is not set when compiling sanitizers, the libtool
does no prefix the dependency path correctly. Fix it, so that programs
can link to sanitizer libraries without error.

This patch changes the depenedency_libs line in libasan.la and
libusan.la from
 dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl '/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la 
'/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la'
to
 dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl =/usr/lib/libstdc++.la 
=/usr/lib/libstdc++.la'

Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [embedded specific]
(LOCAL REV; NOT UPSTREAM) -- sent to oe-core on 2016-09-20

Signed-off-by: Yuanjie Huang 
---
  meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc | 2 ++
  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)

diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc 
b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
index c987ccb..5fe5eaf 100644
--- a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
+++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
@@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ do_install () {
  rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty -p ${D}${infodir}
  fi
  chown -R root:root ${D}
+# Fix broken libtool with stdc++, as sysroot is not set.
+find ${D} -name \*.la -exec sed -i 
"/^dependency_libs=/s@'/usr/lib'@=/usr/lib@g" {} \;

what happens if you remove the .la files completely.
We have some user making use of these libraries directly, otherwise, 
cross gcc can link these sanitizer libraries with just -fsantizer flag 
without problem. Without .la files, his flow can not be libtoolized.


Best,
Yuanjie

  }

  INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS = "1"
--
1.9.1

--
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core


--
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 2:19 AM, Yuanjie Huang
 wrote:
> From: Yuanjie Huang 
>
> Since libtool sysroot is not set when compiling sanitizers, the libtool
> does no prefix the dependency path correctly. Fix it, so that programs
> can link to sanitizer libraries without error.
>
> This patch changes the depenedency_libs line in libasan.la and
> libusan.la from
> dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl '/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la 
> '/usr/lib'/libstdc++.la'
> to
> dependency_libs=' -lpthread -ldl =/usr/lib/libstdc++.la 
> =/usr/lib/libstdc++.la'
>
> Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [embedded specific]
> (LOCAL REV; NOT UPSTREAM) -- sent to oe-core on 2016-09-20
>
> Signed-off-by: Yuanjie Huang 
> ---
>  meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc | 2 ++
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc 
> b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
> index c987ccb..5fe5eaf 100644
> --- a/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
> +++ b/meta/recipes-devtools/gcc/gcc-sanitizers.inc
> @@ -50,6 +50,8 @@ do_install () {
>  rmdir --ignore-fail-on-non-empty -p ${D}${infodir}
>  fi
>  chown -R root:root ${D}
> +# Fix broken libtool with stdc++, as sysroot is not set.
> +find ${D} -name \*.la -exec sed -i 
> "/^dependency_libs=/s@'/usr/lib'@=/usr/lib@g" {} \;

what happens if you remove the .la files completely.

>  }
>
>  INHIBIT_DEFAULT_DEPS = "1"
> --
> 1.9.1
>
> --
> ___
> Openembedded-core mailing list
> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
> http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core

Re: [OE-core] [PATCH 1/1] gcc-sanitizers: Fix libtool library files

[Burton, Ross]

On 20 September 2016 at 10:19, Yuanjie Huang 
wrote:

> Upstream-Status: Inappropriate [embedded specific]
> (LOCAL REV; NOT UPSTREAM) -- sent to oe-core on 2016-09-20
>

You don't need upstream-status tags in commit messages, only patches that
the recipe is applying.

Also please remove your internal tracking data from the commit message.

Ross
-- 
___
Openembedded-core mailing list
Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core