On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 09:23 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> 
> On 6/1/21 9:13 AM, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Tue, 2021-06-01 at 07:58 -0700, Khem Raj wrote:
> > > On 5/31/21 3:40 PM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> > > > Hi folks
> > > > 
> > > > Upstream in the systemd project, a proposal has been made to add a 
> > > > special
> > > > section to output ELF binaries to record soft runtime dependencies, so 
> > > > that
> > > > they could be read and utilised by distribution build systems such as 
> > > > ours
> > > > (they would be translated into RRECOMMENDS in our case). At the moment 
> > > > that
> > > > doesn't seem to have generated a huge amount of interest in the 
> > > > traditional
> > > > distro space, but would it be interesting for us?
> > > > 
> > > >     https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/17416
> > > > 
> > > > For clarity, we (Microsoft) will volunteer to do the integration 
> > > > assuming the
> > > > above pull request gets reopened and merged, which is more likely if we
> > > > express our interest.
> > > 
> > > Finding dlopen dependencies is a neat idea, but it has to be accepted
> > > cross distro, and also applications have to manually declare it in code
> > > if I understand systemd's patch correctly.  This will be hard to
> > > accomplish as you can see changes are spread across apps from distro
> > > point of view. Perhaps there is a smarter way of detecting adding them
> > > in ELF spec itself and then have tools like linker help implement this
> > > and also possibly collect the information or guide the users to achieve
> > > this would be helpful.
> > 
> > Yes ideally ELF shared objects/the linker/the loader would support weak
> > symbols (like dylib on OSX). Unfortunately they do not, and it seems
> > there's no interest to add it becasue there's no concrete use case that
> > shows it's useful. But that cannot happen until there's some support
> > for it. Chicken and egg...
> 
> right and thats why I will be reluctant to go too far at distro level 
> unless there is general interest in wider communities as it can make us 
> an island.
> 
> > There have been lots of theoretical discussions about pros and cons,
> > and my hope was that if at least one distro could find it useful, and
> > could show that it is in practice useful and the theoretical issues are
> > not that problematic and could be solved, others would follow suit.
> 
> you could tool it as a packageconfig for systemd alone and run with it 
> and see how it pans out.
> 
> > So leaving aside other distros, is this something that would concretely
> > benefit the Yocto project for handling the systemd recipe? There are
> > currently 12 dlopen()-based optional dependencies in systemd, and the
> > number grows with each release.
> 
> we could certainly try that, provided systemd upstream is supportive of it.

Yeah, I was thinking of starting from the systemd recipe only. Given
the project has to add support for it, a distro-wide rollout wouldn't
make much sense anyway.

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#53735): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/53735
Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/83227324/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to