Removing the s6 patch gives essentially the same issue: dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_write used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol byte_chr used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol openreadnclose used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol uint16_pack_big used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol fd_close used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol fd_write used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_create used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_catb used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_read used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol openwritenclose_suffix_internal used by debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the libraries dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: 43 other similar warnings have been skipped (use -v to see them all)
This is the compilation line for libs6.so: exec gcc -o libs6.so -std=c99 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-exceptions -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack -fno-stack-protector -pipe -Wall -fPIC -Wl,--hash-style=both -L/usr/lib/skalibs -L/usr/lib/execline -L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -shared -Wl,-soname,libs6.so.2 src/libs6/ftrigr1_zero.lo src /libs6/ftrigr_check.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_end.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_start.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_startf.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_subscribe.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_unsubscribe.lo s rc/libs6/ftrigr_update.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_wait_and.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_wait_or.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_zero.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_clean.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_fifodir_make .lo src/libs6/ftrigw_notify.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_notifyb.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_notifyb_nosig.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_backend_cdb.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_backe nd_fs.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_ip4.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_ip6.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_reversedns.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules _keycheck_uidgid.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_params_free.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_uidgid_cdb.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_uidgid_fs.lo src/libs6/s6_supervise_loc k.lo src/libs6/s6_supervise_lock_mode.lo src/libs6/s6_svc_write.lo src/libs6/s6_svc_writectl.lo src/libs6/s6_svstatus_pack.lo src/libs6/s6_svstatus_read.lo src/lib s6/s6_svstatus_unpack.lo src/libs6/s6_svstatus_write.lo src/libs6/s6lock_acquire.lo src/libs6/s6lock_check.lo src/libs6/s6lock_end.lo src/libs6/s6lock_release.lo s rc/libs6/s6lock_start.lo src/libs6/s6lock_startf.lo src/libs6/s6lock_update.lo src/libs6/s6lock_wait_and.lo src/libs6/s6lock_wait_or.lo src/libs6/s6lock_zero.lo sr c/libs6/s6_fdholder_delete.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_delete_async.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_getdump.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list_async .lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list_cb.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve_async.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve_cb.lo src/libs6/s6_fd holder_setdump.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_store.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_store_async.lo On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Buck Evan <[email protected]> wrote: > This is the compilation line for libexecline.so > > exec gcc -o libexecline.so -std=c99 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-exceptions > -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack > -fno-stack-protector > -pipe -Wall -fPIC -Wl,--hash-style=both -L/usr/lib/skalibs > -L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -shared -Wl,-soname,libexecline.so.2 > src/libexecline/el_execsequence.lo sr > c/libexecline/el_getstrict.lo src/libexecline/el_parse.lo > src/libexecline/el_parse_from_buffer.lo > src/libexecline/el_parse_from_string.lo src/libexecline/el_popenv > .lo src/libexecline/el_pushenv.lo src/libexecline/el_semicolon.lo > src/libexecline/el_spawn0.lo src/libexecline/el_spawn1.lo > src/libexecline/el_substandrun.lo src/l > ibexecline/el_substandrun_str.lo src/libexecline/el_substitute.lo > src/libexecline/el_transform.lo src/libexecline/el_vardupl.lo > src/libexecline/exlsn_define.lo src > /libexecline/exlsn_elglob.lo src/libexecline/exlsn_import.lo > src/libexecline/exlsn_multidefine.lo src/libexecline/exlsn_exlp.lo > src/libexecline/exlsn_main.lo src/l > ibexecline/exlsn_free.lo src/libexecline/exlp.lo > > I don't see -lskarnet. > > On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Buck Evan <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Removing the execline patch results in: >> >> >> dh_shlibdeps -O--parallel -O--autodest >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol waitpid_nointr used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol PROG used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_catb used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol env_get2 used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol env_string used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol byte_chr used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol pathexec0_run used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol str_start used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_free used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol uint320_scan_base used by >> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in >> none of the libraries >> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: 18 other similar warnings have been skipped (use >> -v to see them all) >> >> >> >> The manpage >> <http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/jaunty/man1/dpkg-shlibdeps.1.html> >> says: >> >> *symbol* *sym* *used* *by* *binary* *found* *in* *none* *of* *the* >> *libraries.* >> The indicated symbol has not been found in the libraries >> linked >> with the binary. The *binary* is most likely a library and >> it >> needs to be linked with an additional library during the >> build >> process (option *-l**library* of the linker). >> >> >> >> It's true that the execline.so doesn't link to skalibs.so even though it >> requires its symbols: >> >> >> $ ldd /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 >> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffff2dfe000) >> libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007ff5dcf8c000) >> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007ff5dd53f000) >> >> >> >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Laurent Bercot <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> >>> (Please follow-up this part of the thread to the skaware mailing-list.) >>> >>> On 12/08/2015 08:37, Buck Evan wrote: >>> >>>> - >>>> >>>> https://github.com/bukzor/s6-packaging/blob/dockerize/execline/debian/patches/02_link_against_libskarnet.patch >>>> - >>>> >>>> https://github.com/bukzor/s6-packaging/blob/dockerize/s6/debian/patches/75_dot_so_link_skarlib.patch >>>> >>>> >>>> Again this is because the build derps without them, but I forget the >>>> exact >>>> failure mode. >>>> I'll track down details upon request. >>>> >>> >>> The parts for binaries and static libraries are clearly invalid. If >>> something breaks while building those, then there's a problem with the >>> way the build is invoked, or the options to configure. >>> For static libraries, -lskarnet is nonsense. For binaries, -lskarnet >>> is already listed in the requirements ($^) and should be translated >>> to a .a or .so by vpath resolution, so it is incorrect to list it >>> again. Something is definitely wrong if the package builds with them >>> while it won't build without. >>> >>> I'm still unsure about the shared libraries parts. I don't think >>> it should be needed, but my test suite isn't up to par and I need to >>> update it to test the problematic cases and understand exactly what >>> is happening. >>> >>> In the meantime, please find the problem with your build and fix it. >>> Chances are you won't need the shared libraries patch either once >>> you've done that. :) >>> >>> >>> It seems likely to me that you'll want to figure out and fix these two >>>> issues given your response to the above patch. >>>> Is that right? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, and now you have work to do too. :P >>> >>> -- >>> Laurent >>> >>> >> >
