an alternative implementaton of the glibc-specific argp* interface?

an alternative implementaton of the glibc-specific argp* interface?

[u-wsnj]

Hello,

The background: a purely musl-based environment.

I am trying to compile elfutils
 https://fedorahosted.org/elfutils/
They are said to be necessary for building certain xorg drivers.

Unfortunately the package uses the argp* interface, includes <argp.h>
in many places.

There are some musl-compatibility patches for elfutils
(https://github.com/openwrt/packages/tree/master/libs/elfutils/patches)
but they do not seem to address this issue - they possibly suffice
on systems which also have glibc and hence the expected includes in the
"system" directories.

Is anybody aware of sufficent stubs for this gnu-specific interface?

There is "gnulib" but it is a very heavyweight tool for such a purpose,
it enforces the use of and coordination with the whole auto* suite
and is meant to be used by the upstream developers rather than at
deployment builds.

Any suggestions?

Rune

Re: an alternative implementaton of the glibc-specific argp* interface?

[Waldemar Brodkorb]

Hi,
u-wsnj@aetey.se wrote,

> Hello,
> 
> The background: a purely musl-based environment.
> 
> I am trying to compile elfutils
>  https://fedorahosted.org/elfutils/
> They are said to be necessary for building certain xorg drivers.
> 
> Unfortunately the package uses the argp* interface, includes <argp.h>
> in many places.
> 
> There are some musl-compatibility patches for elfutils
> (https://github.com/openwrt/packages/tree/master/libs/elfutils/patches)
> but they do not seem to address this issue - they possibly suffice
> on systems which also have glibc and hence the expected includes in the
> "system" directories.
> 
> Is anybody aware of sufficent stubs for this gnu-specific interface?
> 
> There is "gnulib" but it is a very heavyweight tool for such a purpose,
> it enforces the use of and coordination with the whole auto* suite
> and is meant to be used by the upstream developers rather than at
> deployment builds.
> 
> Any suggestions?

May be this one:
http://lists.uclibc.org/pipermail/uclibc/2010-November/044521.html

It is not highly integrated into uClibc.

best regards
 Waldemar

Re: an alternative implementaton of the glibc-specific argp* interface?

[Felix Janda]

argp-standalone from

http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/misc/

seems to be the standard replacement for argp. (It's used by BSDs,
sabotage, alpine, gentoo, ...) It's a portable version of the glibc
implementation.

Felix

Re: an alternative implementaton of the glibc-specific argp* interface?

[u-wsnj]

On Wed, Jan 07, 2015 at 08:50:12PM +0100, Felix Janda wrote:
> argp-standalone from
> 
> http://www.lysator.liu.se/~nisse/misc/
> 
> seems to be the standard replacement for argp. (It's used by BSDs,
> sabotage, alpine, gentoo, ...) It's a portable version of the glibc
> implementation.

Oh. Thanks. This is exactly what I was looking for.

A search for "argp standalone" would have given the answer at once
but somehow I didn't ask for this combination.

Rune