From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/8561 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Problems? compiling musl toolchain Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 11:00:01 -0400 Message-ID: <20150924150001.GJ17773@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <5604077E.3080507@bluewin.ch> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443106826 25253 80.91.229.3 (24 Sep 2015 15:00:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Sep 2015 15:00:26 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-8573-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Sep 24 17:00:20 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zf80P-0001ka-VE for gllmg-musl@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Sep 2015 17:00:18 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 7692 invoked by uid 550); 24 Sep 2015 15:00:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 7662 invoked from network); 24 Sep 2015 15:00:14 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5604077E.3080507@bluewin.ch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:8561 Archived-At: On Thu, Sep 24, 2015 at 04:23:58PM +0200, Ruben Winistörfer wrote: > First: Compiling GCC 5.2.0 (and also 4.9.3) with musl 1.1.11 > toolchain I get a lot of warnings about missing sentinels in > function calls. Compiling GCC (same versions) with glibc toolchain > there's no such warning at all. > Replacing the function call sentinels 'NULL' with '(char *)NULL' in > the affected source code of GCC makes the warnings disappear. This warning is correct; the GCC code is wrong. NULL is not a valid way to pass a null pointer to a variadic function, especially not in C++ code. > My question: Does the reason for these warnings have some impact on > the health of the toolchain (is there something wrong?) or are they > just a byproduct of the correctness and standards-conformance of > musl? musl has arranged things so that this will work ok (and won't blow up) at runtime, but what GCC's source is doing formally incorrect and should be fixed. > Second: Compiling with a musl 1.1.11, GCC 5.2.0 (and 4.9.3), > Binutils 2.25.1 toolchain I get the following info (warning) over an > over again: > > ....ld: copy reloc against protected `stdout' is dangerous > ....ld: copy reloc against protected `stdin' is dangerous > ....ld: copy reloc against protected `stderr' is dangerous > > Same can be seen in Alpine Linux build logs: e.g. http://build.alpinelinux.org/buildlogs/build-edge-x86_64/main/patchutils/patchutils-0.3.4-r0.log > > Reason for these "warnings" seems to be a change in the linker from > binutils version 2.25 to 2.25.1. > Lines 2677 to 2680 in 'binutils-2.25.1/bfd/elflink.c' are new and in > my opinion the source of the issued warning. > My C knowledge is minimal but as far as I can tell this means that > the problem - if there is one at all - was already there before > binutils version 2.25.1, the linker just did not print the > "warning". > > I haven't seen this warning before using glibc. So i guess it has to > be musl-related. > > What do you think? Is there a problem or can I ignore these warnings? You can safely ignore them. I do plan to find a way to make them go away in the next release though, since they're confusing and concerning to many users. Rich