* Unable to build with --enable-shared @ 2016-10-22 20:37 Samuel Sadok 2016-10-22 21:58 ` Szabolcs Nagy 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-22 20:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl Hi! I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils 2.25 and 2.26. This is what I did: $ make clean $ ./configure --prefix=/usr/packages/musl --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu CFLAGS='-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-' --enable-static --enable-shared --disable-gcc-wrapper $ make [...] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c [...] x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- -nostdlib -shared -Wl,-e,_dlstart -o lib/libc.so obj/src/aio/aio.lo [a ton of objects] obj/ldso/dynlink.lo /usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld: obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo: relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against protected symbol `execve' can not be used when making a shared object /usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld: final link failed: Bad value collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status make: *** [lib/libc.so] Error 1 This is the toolchain I am using: $ /usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld -v GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.27 $ x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -v Using built-in specs. COLLECT_GCC=/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc-original COLLECT_LTO_WRAPPER=/usr/packages/gcc-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/libexec/gcc/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/6.1.0/lto-wrapper Target: x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Configured with: /Data/Projects/Linux/gcc/fetch/gcc-6.1.0/configure --enable-languages=all --without-headers --disable-multilib --disable-shared --enable-static --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-gmp=/usr/packages/gmp --with-mpfr=/usr/packages/mpfr --with-mpc=/usr/packages/mpc --prefix=/usr/packages/gcc-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu : (reconfigured) /Data/Projects/Linux/gcc/fetch/gcc-6.1.0/configure --enable-languages=all --without-headers --disable-multilib --disable-shared --enable-static --target=x86_64-pc-linux-gnu --with-gmp=/usr/packages/gmp --with-mpfr=/usr/packages/mpfr --with-mpc=/usr/packages/mpc --prefix=/usr/packages/gcc-x86_64-pc-linux-gnu Thread model: posix gcc version 6.1.0 (GCC) Can anyone confirm this issue with binutils >= 2.26? It seems strange to me that this would not have come up yet, so maybe someone has an idea what else might be the problem? Samuel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-22 20:37 Unable to build with --enable-shared Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-22 21:58 ` Szabolcs Nagy 2016-10-23 0:22 ` Samuel Sadok 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Szabolcs Nagy @ 2016-10-22 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl * Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: > I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in > unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) > suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils > 2.25 and 2.26. > that bug is different, that's about object symbols (swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) > $ make > [...] > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 > -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include > -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- > -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags > [...] > x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 > -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include > -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- > -nostdlib -shared -Wl,-e,_dlstart -o lib/libc.so obj/src/aio/aio.lo [a > ton of objects] obj/ldso/dynlink.lo > /usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld: obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo: > relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against protected symbol `execve' can not be > used when making a shared object > /usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-ld: final link failed: Bad value > collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status > make: *** [lib/libc.so] Error 1 > execve is a protected function symbol, so it should be bound locally, i think R_X86_64_PC32 is ok for that, so it's not clear to me what goes wrong.. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-22 21:58 ` Szabolcs Nagy @ 2016-10-23 0:22 ` Samuel Sadok 2016-10-23 16:17 ` Rich Felker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-23 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl 2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: > * Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: >> I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in >> unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) >> suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils >> 2.25 and 2.26. >> > > that bug is different, that's about object symbols > > (swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, > and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the > gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, > such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue > does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected > to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. > >> $ make >> [...] >> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 >> -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include >> -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- >> -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c > > some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and compared the logs. Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h CFLAGS_C99FSE = CFLAGS_MEMOPS = CFLAGS_NOSSP = LDFLAGS_AUTO = LIBCC = config.mak on Ubuntu: CFLAGS_AUTO = -Os -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffunction-sections -fdata-sections -Werror=implicit-function-declaration -Werror=implicit-int -Werror=pointer-sign -Werror=pointer-arith -include vis.h CFLAGS_C99FSE = -std=c99 -nostdinc -ffreestanding -fexcess-precision=standard -frounding-math -Wa,--noexecstack CFLAGS_MEMOPS = -fno-tree-loop-distribute-patterns CFLAGS_NOSSP = -fno-stack-protector LDFLAGS_AUTO = -Wl,--sort-section,alignment -Wl,--sort-common -Wl,--gc-sections -Wl,--hash-style=both -Wl,--no-undefined -Wl,--exclude-libs=ALL -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions LIBCC = -lgcc -lgcc_eh After adding the missing flags (except the seemingly unused -lgcc_eh), the build succeeded on macOS. I'm not sure if this can be fixed cleanly by passing appropriate arguments to configure or if the script should be patched. My experience with configure scripts is limited, but I will try to look further into what went wrong exactly. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-23 0:22 ` Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-23 16:17 ` Rich Felker 2016-10-23 22:20 ` Samuel Sadok 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Rich Felker @ 2016-10-23 16:17 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:22:28AM +0200, Samuel Sadok wrote: > 2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: > > * Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: > >> I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in > >> unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) > >> suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils > >> 2.25 and 2.26. > >> > > > > that bug is different, that's about object symbols > > > > (swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, > > and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the > > gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, > > such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue > > does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected > > to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) > > That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. > > > > >> $ make > >> [...] > >> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 > >> -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include > >> -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- > >> -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c > > > > some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags > > Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. > > I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a > Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and > compared the logs. > Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: > > config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): > > CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h > CFLAGS_C99FSE = > CFLAGS_MEMOPS = > CFLAGS_NOSSP = > LDFLAGS_AUTO = > LIBCC = This probably indicates something is wrong with your cross toolchain; even if you manually fix config.mak, I would be concerned that something might have been built wrong. What cross toolchain are you using and how was it setup? How did you invoke configure? Rich ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-23 16:17 ` Rich Felker @ 2016-10-23 22:20 ` Samuel Sadok 2016-10-24 0:19 ` Laine Gholson 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-23 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl 2016-10-23 18:17 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:22:28AM +0200, Samuel Sadok wrote: >> 2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: >> > * Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: >> >> I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in >> >> unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) >> >> suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils >> >> 2.25 and 2.26. >> >> >> > >> > that bug is different, that's about object symbols >> > >> > (swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, >> > and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the >> > gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, >> > such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue >> > does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected >> > to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) >> >> That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. >> >> > >> >> $ make >> >> [...] >> >> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 >> >> -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include >> >> -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- >> >> -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c >> > >> > some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags >> >> Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. >> >> I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a >> Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and >> compared the logs. >> Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: >> >> config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): >> >> CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h >> CFLAGS_C99FSE = >> CFLAGS_MEMOPS = >> CFLAGS_NOSSP = >> LDFLAGS_AUTO = >> LIBCC = > > This probably indicates something is wrong with your cross toolchain; > even if you manually fix config.mak, I would be concerned that > something might have been built wrong. What cross toolchain are you > using and how was it setup? How did you invoke configure? > > Rich I managed to track down the problem. I'm using a cross-toolchain I built from source with a slight misconfiguration. Specifically, I must tell it where it is (-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-), otherwise it uses the (incompatible) default linker. Now when the configure script checks whether some flag is working, it forgets to pass the user-defined $CFLAGS to the compiler, which then fails: tryflag () { printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then [...] Thus, we end up with no flags at all. Even though I'm aware that my setup is quite non-standard, I would consider this a bug in the configure script. I appended a patch that fixes the problem in all places where I spotted it. Using this patch I am able to configure and build musl as expected. Does this seem reasonable to you? From 084678f6c93ed0bf305ea0fbb35a33810c4c9ccc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:10:04 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Pass CFLAGS to compiler under all circumstances in configure script --- configure | 15 ++++++++------- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/configure b/configure index 707eb12..c1466ce 100755 --- a/configure +++ b/configure @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" echo "#if $1" >> "$tmpc" echo "#error yes" >> "$tmpc" echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" -if $CC $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then +if $CC $CFLAGS $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then printf "false\n" return 1 else @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ fi tryflag () { printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" -if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then +if $CC $CFLAGS $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then printf "yes\n" eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" eval "$1=\${$1# }" @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ fi tryldflag () { printf "checking whether linker accepts %s... " "$2" echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" -if $CC $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then +if $CC $CFLAGS $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then printf "yes\n" eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" eval "$1=\${$1# }" @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ echo "#if ! __GLIBC__" >> "$tmpc" echo "#error no" >> "$tmpc" echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" printf "checking for toolchain wrapper to build... " -if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then +if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC $CFLAGS -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then echo "none" elif test "$cc_family" = gcc ; then gcc_wrapper=yes @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ fi # Find the target architecture # printf "checking target system type... " -test -n "$target" || target=$($CC -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) || target=unknown +test -n "$target" || target=$($CC $CFLAGS -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) || target=unknown printf "%s\n" "$target" # @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ test "$debug" = yes && CFLAGS_AUTO=-g printf "checking whether we should preprocess assembly to add debugging information... " if fnmatch '-g*|*\ -g*' "$CFLAGS_AUTO $CFLAGS" && test -f "tools/add-cfi.$ARCH.awk" && - printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line 1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC -g -x assembler -c -o /dev/null 2>/dev/null - + printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line 1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC $CFLAGS -g -x assembler -c -o /dev/null 2>/dev/null - then ADD_CFI=yes else @@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ tryldflag LDFLAGS_AUTO -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions # Find compiler runtime library test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc_eh test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lcompiler_rt -test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC -print-file-name=libpcc.a 2>/dev/null` \ +test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC $CFLAGS -print-file-name=libpcc.a 2>/dev/null` \ && tryldflag LIBCC "$try_libcc" printf "using compiler runtime libraries: %s\n" "$LIBCC" @@ -719,6 +719,7 @@ printf "creating config.mak... " cmdline=$(quote "$0") for i ; do cmdline="$cmdline $(quote "$i")" ; done + exec 3>&1 1>config.mak -- 2.8.1 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-23 22:20 ` Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-24 0:19 ` Laine Gholson 2016-10-24 0:28 ` Rich Felker 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Laine Gholson @ 2016-10-24 0:19 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl I suggest that you put '-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu', in $CC, because it is needed for the C compiler to run correctly, e.g CC="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu", and that will work fine with the current configure script. On 10/23/16 17:20, Samuel Sadok wrote: > 2016-10-23 18:17 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>: >> On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:22:28AM +0200, Samuel Sadok wrote: >>> 2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: >>>> * Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: >>>>> I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in >>>>> unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) >>>>> suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils >>>>> 2.25 and 2.26. >>>>> >>>> >>>> that bug is different, that's about object symbols >>>> >>>> (swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, >>>> and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the >>>> gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, >>>> such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue >>>> does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected >>>> to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) >>> >>> That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. >>> >>>> >>>>> $ make >>>>> [...] >>>>> x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 >>>>> -I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include >>>>> -I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- >>>>> -fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c >>>> >>>> some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags >>> >>> Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. >>> >>> I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a >>> Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and >>> compared the logs. >>> Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: >>> >>> config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): >>> >>> CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h >>> CFLAGS_C99FSE = >>> CFLAGS_MEMOPS = >>> CFLAGS_NOSSP = >>> LDFLAGS_AUTO = >>> LIBCC = >> >> This probably indicates something is wrong with your cross toolchain; >> even if you manually fix config.mak, I would be concerned that >> something might have been built wrong. What cross toolchain are you >> using and how was it setup? How did you invoke configure? >> >> Rich > > I managed to track down the problem. > > I'm using a cross-toolchain I built from source with a slight > misconfiguration. Specifically, I must tell it where it is > (-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-), otherwise it uses the > (incompatible) default linker. > > Now when the configure script checks whether some flag is working, it > forgets to pass the user-defined $CFLAGS to the compiler, which then > fails: > > tryflag () { > printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > [...] > > Thus, we end up with no flags at all. > > Even though I'm aware that my setup is quite non-standard, I would > consider this a bug in the configure script. I appended a patch that > fixes the problem in all places where I spotted it. Using this patch I > am able to configure and build musl as expected. > Does this seem reasonable to you? > > > > From 084678f6c93ed0bf305ea0fbb35a33810c4c9ccc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:10:04 +0200 > Subject: [PATCH] Pass CFLAGS to compiler under all circumstances in configure > script > > --- > configure | 15 ++++++++------- > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/configure b/configure > index 707eb12..c1466ce 100755 > --- a/configure > +++ b/configure > @@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > echo "#if $1" >> "$tmpc" > echo "#error yes" >> "$tmpc" > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" > -if $CC $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > +if $CC $CFLAGS $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > printf "false\n" > return 1 > else > @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ fi > tryflag () { > printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > -if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > +if $CC $CFLAGS $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > printf "yes\n" > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" > eval "$1=\${$1# }" > @@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ fi > tryldflag () { > printf "checking whether linker accepts %s... " "$2" > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > -if $CC $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >> /dev/null 2>&1 ; then > +if $CC $CFLAGS $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null > "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > printf "yes\n" > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" > eval "$1=\${$1# }" > @@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ echo "#if ! __GLIBC__" >> "$tmpc" > echo "#error no" >> "$tmpc" > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" > printf "checking for toolchain wrapper to build... " > -if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null > 2>&1 ; then > +if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC $CFLAGS -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >> /dev/null 2>&1 ; then > echo "none" > elif test "$cc_family" = gcc ; then > gcc_wrapper=yes > @@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ fi > # Find the target architecture > # > printf "checking target system type... " > -test -n "$target" || target=$($CC -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) || target=unknown > +test -n "$target" || target=$($CC $CFLAGS -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) > || target=unknown > printf "%s\n" "$target" > > # > @@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ test "$debug" = yes && CFLAGS_AUTO=-g > printf "checking whether we should preprocess assembly to add > debugging information... " > if fnmatch '-g*|*\ -g*' "$CFLAGS_AUTO $CFLAGS" && > test -f "tools/add-cfi.$ARCH.awk" && > - printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line > 1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC -g -x assembler -c -o /dev/null > 2>/dev/null - > + printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line > 1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC $CFLAGS -g -x assembler -c -o > /dev/null 2>/dev/null - > then > ADD_CFI=yes > else > @@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ tryldflag LDFLAGS_AUTO -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions > # Find compiler runtime library > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc_eh > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lcompiler_rt > -test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC -print-file-name=libpcc.a 2>/dev/null` \ > +test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC $CFLAGS -print-file-name=libpcc.a > 2>/dev/null` \ > && tryldflag LIBCC "$try_libcc" > printf "using compiler runtime libraries: %s\n" "$LIBCC" > > @@ -719,6 +719,7 @@ printf "creating config.mak... " > cmdline=$(quote "$0") > for i ; do cmdline="$cmdline $(quote "$i")" ; done > > + > exec 3>&1 1>config.mak > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-24 0:19 ` Laine Gholson @ 2016-10-24 0:28 ` Rich Felker 2016-10-24 10:22 ` Samuel Sadok 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Rich Felker @ 2016-10-24 0:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 07:19:02PM -0500, Laine Gholson wrote: > I suggest that you put '-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu', in > $CC, because it is needed for the C compiler to run correctly, e.g > CC="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu", > and that will work fine with the current configure script. Indeed. Options which are of the class "the compiler driver does not work at all, or does not have the right target/ABI, without this option" belong in $CC. This also applies to things like -m32. In Samuel's case, though, I think the cross compiler was just built incorrectly if it's not searching the right tool path by default. Maybe it doesn't realize it's a cross compiler or something. Rich > On 10/23/16 17:20, Samuel Sadok wrote: > >2016-10-23 18:17 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>: > >>On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:22:28AM +0200, Samuel Sadok wrote: > >>>2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: > >>>>* Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: > >>>>>I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in > >>>>>unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) > >>>>>suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils > >>>>>2.25 and 2.26. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>>that bug is different, that's about object symbols > >>>> > >>>>(swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, > >>>>and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the > >>>>gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, > >>>>such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue > >>>>does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected > >>>>to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) > >>> > >>>That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. > >>> > >>>> > >>>>>$ make > >>>>>[...] > >>>>>x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 > >>>>>-I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include > >>>>>-I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- > >>>>>-fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c > >>>> > >>>>some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags > >>> > >>>Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. > >>> > >>>I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a > >>>Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and > >>>compared the logs. > >>>Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: > >>> > >>>config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): > >>> > >>>CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h > >>>CFLAGS_C99FSE = > >>>CFLAGS_MEMOPS = > >>>CFLAGS_NOSSP = > >>>LDFLAGS_AUTO = > >>>LIBCC = > >> > >>This probably indicates something is wrong with your cross toolchain; > >>even if you manually fix config.mak, I would be concerned that > >>something might have been built wrong. What cross toolchain are you > >>using and how was it setup? How did you invoke configure? > >> > >>Rich > > > >I managed to track down the problem. > > > >I'm using a cross-toolchain I built from source with a slight > >misconfiguration. Specifically, I must tell it where it is > >(-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-), otherwise it uses the > >(incompatible) default linker. > > > >Now when the configure script checks whether some flag is working, it > >forgets to pass the user-defined $CFLAGS to the compiler, which then > >fails: > > > >tryflag () { > >printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" > >echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > >if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > >[...] > > > >Thus, we end up with no flags at all. > > > >Even though I'm aware that my setup is quite non-standard, I would > >consider this a bug in the configure script. I appended a patch that > >fixes the problem in all places where I spotted it. Using this patch I > >am able to configure and build musl as expected. > >Does this seem reasonable to you? > > > > > > > >From 084678f6c93ed0bf305ea0fbb35a33810c4c9ccc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > >From: Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> > >Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:10:04 +0200 > >Subject: [PATCH] Pass CFLAGS to compiler under all circumstances in configure > > script > > > >--- > > configure | 15 ++++++++------- > > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) > > > >diff --git a/configure b/configure > >index 707eb12..c1466ce 100755 > >--- a/configure > >+++ b/configure > >@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > > echo "#if $1" >> "$tmpc" > > echo "#error yes" >> "$tmpc" > > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" > >-if $CC $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > >+if $CC $CFLAGS $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > > printf "false\n" > > return 1 > > else > >@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ fi > > tryflag () { > > printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" > > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > >-if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > >+if $CC $CFLAGS $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > > printf "yes\n" > > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" > > eval "$1=\${$1# }" > >@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ fi > > tryldflag () { > > printf "checking whether linker accepts %s... " "$2" > > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" > >-if $CC $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null "$tmpc" > >>/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > >+if $CC $CFLAGS $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null > >"$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > > printf "yes\n" > > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" > > eval "$1=\${$1# }" > >@@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ echo "#if ! __GLIBC__" >> "$tmpc" > > echo "#error no" >> "$tmpc" > > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" > > printf "checking for toolchain wrapper to build... " > >-if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null > >2>&1 ; then > >+if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC $CFLAGS -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" > >>/dev/null 2>&1 ; then > > echo "none" > > elif test "$cc_family" = gcc ; then > > gcc_wrapper=yes > >@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ fi > > # Find the target architecture > > # > > printf "checking target system type... " > >-test -n "$target" || target=$($CC -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) || target=unknown > >+test -n "$target" || target=$($CC $CFLAGS -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) > >|| target=unknown > > printf "%s\n" "$target" > > > > # > >@@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ test "$debug" = yes && CFLAGS_AUTO=-g > > printf "checking whether we should preprocess assembly to add > >debugging information... " > > if fnmatch '-g*|*\ -g*' "$CFLAGS_AUTO $CFLAGS" && > > test -f "tools/add-cfi.$ARCH.awk" && > >- printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line > >1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC -g -x assembler -c -o /dev/null > >2>/dev/null - > >+ printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line > >1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC $CFLAGS -g -x assembler -c -o > >/dev/null 2>/dev/null - > > then > > ADD_CFI=yes > > else > >@@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ tryldflag LDFLAGS_AUTO -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions > > # Find compiler runtime library > > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc_eh > > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lcompiler_rt > >-test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC -print-file-name=libpcc.a 2>/dev/null` \ > >+test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC $CFLAGS -print-file-name=libpcc.a > >2>/dev/null` \ > > && tryldflag LIBCC "$try_libcc" > > printf "using compiler runtime libraries: %s\n" "$LIBCC" > > > >@@ -719,6 +719,7 @@ printf "creating config.mak... " > > cmdline=$(quote "$0") > > for i ; do cmdline="$cmdline $(quote "$i")" ; done > > > >+ > > exec 3>&1 1>config.mak > > > > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: Unable to build with --enable-shared 2016-10-24 0:28 ` Rich Felker @ 2016-10-24 10:22 ` Samuel Sadok 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Samuel Sadok @ 2016-10-24 10:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: musl 2016-10-24 2:28 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>: > On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 07:19:02PM -0500, Laine Gholson wrote: >> I suggest that you put '-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu', in >> $CC, because it is needed for the C compiler to run correctly, e.g >> CC="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu", >> and that will work fine with the current configure script. > > Indeed. Options which are of the class "the compiler driver does not > work at all, or does not have the right target/ABI, without this > option" belong in $CC. This also applies to things like -m32. You're right, that seems a lot cleaner. However I still think that the configure script should report that something is wrong. For instance, you could call tryflag and tryldflag with an empty flag argument and abort if it fails, since further checks are no longer valid. I think that would be nicely in line with the idea of a configure script, which is in part to test the waters and fail gracefully if it's not happy with its environment. > > In Samuel's case, though, I think the cross compiler was just built > incorrectly if it's not searching the right tool path by default. > Maybe it doesn't realize it's a cross compiler or something. > > Rich Yes, I messed up the prefixes when building the toolchain. In particular, the binutils and gcc are in different locations, which confuses them. It works though when I set up symlinks and use the -B flag. > > >> On 10/23/16 17:20, Samuel Sadok wrote: >> >2016-10-23 18:17 GMT+02:00 Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org>: >> >>On Sun, Oct 23, 2016 at 02:22:28AM +0200, Samuel Sadok wrote: >> >>>2016-10-22 23:58 GMT+02:00 Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net>: >> >>>>* Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> [2016-10-22 22:37:46 +0200]: >> >>>>>I am unable to build musl with --enable-shared. Multiple issues in >> >>>>>unrelated projects (e.g. here: https://bugs.swift.org/browse/SR-1023) >> >>>>>suggest that the culprit is a change in behaviour between binutils >> >>>>>2.25 and 2.26. >> >>>>> >> >>>> >> >>>>that bug is different, that's about object symbols >> >>>> >> >>>>(swift seems to misuse protected visibility objects, >> >>>>and instead of fixing the problem they switched to the >> >>>>gold linker which does not yet have the bfd linker fix, >> >>>>such incompetence is frustrating.. however the issue >> >>>>does not affect musl: we don't mark objects protected >> >>>>to avoid issues with broken toolchains.) >> >>> >> >>>That's precisely why I'm trying to get away from Apple. >> >>> >> >>>> >> >>>>>$ make >> >>>>>[...] >> >>>>>x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-gcc -D_XOPEN_SOURCE=700 -I./arch/x86_64 >> >>>>>-I./arch/generic -Iobj/src/internal -I./src/internal -Iobj/include >> >>>>>-I./include -include vis.h -B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu- >> >>>>>-fPIC -c -o obj/src/process/posix_spawn.lo src/process/posix_spawn.c >> >>>> >> >>>>some flags are missing here.. e.g. freestanding flags >> >>> >> >>>Thanks for the pointer, that turned out to be the problem. >> >>> >> >>>I should mention that I am cross-compiling from macOS. Since I had a >> >>>Linux VM flying around, I tried to build musl there (success) and >> >>>compared the logs. >> >>>Looking at config.mak, there apparently was a serious misconfiguration: >> >>> >> >>>config.mak on the cross-build system (macOS): >> >>> >> >>>CFLAGS_AUTO = -include vis.h >> >>>CFLAGS_C99FSE = >> >>>CFLAGS_MEMOPS = >> >>>CFLAGS_NOSSP = >> >>>LDFLAGS_AUTO = >> >>>LIBCC = >> >> >> >>This probably indicates something is wrong with your cross toolchain; >> >>even if you manually fix config.mak, I would be concerned that >> >>something might have been built wrong. What cross toolchain are you >> >>using and how was it setup? How did you invoke configure? >> >> >> >>Rich >> > >> >I managed to track down the problem. >> > >> >I'm using a cross-toolchain I built from source with a slight >> >misconfiguration. Specifically, I must tell it where it is >> >(-B/usr/local/bin/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu-), otherwise it uses the >> >(incompatible) default linker. >> > >> >Now when the configure script checks whether some flag is working, it >> >forgets to pass the user-defined $CFLAGS to the compiler, which then >> >fails: >> > >> >tryflag () { >> >printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" >> >echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" >> >if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> >[...] >> > >> >Thus, we end up with no flags at all. >> > >> >Even though I'm aware that my setup is quite non-standard, I would >> >consider this a bug in the configure script. I appended a patch that >> >fixes the problem in all places where I spotted it. Using this patch I >> >am able to configure and build musl as expected. >> >Does this seem reasonable to you? >> > >> > >> > >> >From 084678f6c93ed0bf305ea0fbb35a33810c4c9ccc Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> >From: Samuel Sadok <innovation-labs@appinstall.ch> >> >Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 00:10:04 +0200 >> >Subject: [PATCH] Pass CFLAGS to compiler under all circumstances in configure >> > script >> > >> >--- >> > configure | 15 ++++++++------- >> > 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) >> > >> >diff --git a/configure b/configure >> >index 707eb12..c1466ce 100755 >> >--- a/configure >> >+++ b/configure >> >@@ -72,7 +72,7 @@ echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" >> > echo "#if $1" >> "$tmpc" >> > echo "#error yes" >> "$tmpc" >> > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" >> >-if $CC $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> >+if $CC $CFLAGS $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> > printf "false\n" >> > return 1 >> > else >> >@@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ fi >> > tryflag () { >> > printf "checking whether compiler accepts %s... " "$2" >> > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" >> >-if $CC $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> >+if $CC $CFLAGS $CFLAGS_TRY $2 -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> > printf "yes\n" >> > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" >> > eval "$1=\${$1# }" >> >@@ -98,7 +98,7 @@ fi >> > tryldflag () { >> > printf "checking whether linker accepts %s... " "$2" >> > echo "typedef int x;" > "$tmpc" >> >-if $CC $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >> >>/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> >+if $CC $CFLAGS $LDFLAGS_TRY -nostdlib -shared "$2" -o /dev/null >> >"$tmpc" >/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> > printf "yes\n" >> > eval "$1=\"\${$1} \$2\"" >> > eval "$1=\${$1# }" >> >@@ -275,7 +275,7 @@ echo "#if ! __GLIBC__" >> "$tmpc" >> > echo "#error no" >> "$tmpc" >> > echo "#endif" >> "$tmpc" >> > printf "checking for toolchain wrapper to build... " >> >-if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >/dev/null >> >2>&1 ; then >> >+if test "$wrapper" = auto && ! $CC $CFLAGS -c -o /dev/null "$tmpc" >> >>/dev/null 2>&1 ; then >> > echo "none" >> > elif test "$cc_family" = gcc ; then >> > gcc_wrapper=yes >> >@@ -303,7 +303,7 @@ fi >> > # Find the target architecture >> > # >> > printf "checking target system type... " >> >-test -n "$target" || target=$($CC -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) || target=unknown >> >+test -n "$target" || target=$($CC $CFLAGS -dumpmachine 2>/dev/null) >> >|| target=unknown >> > printf "%s\n" "$target" >> > >> > # >> >@@ -397,7 +397,7 @@ test "$debug" = yes && CFLAGS_AUTO=-g >> > printf "checking whether we should preprocess assembly to add >> >debugging information... " >> > if fnmatch '-g*|*\ -g*' "$CFLAGS_AUTO $CFLAGS" && >> > test -f "tools/add-cfi.$ARCH.awk" && >> >- printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line >> >1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC -g -x assembler -c -o /dev/null >> >2>/dev/null - >> >+ printf ".file 1 \"srcfile.s\"\n.line >> >1\n.cfi_startproc\n.cfi_endproc" | $CC $CFLAGS -g -x assembler -c -o >> >/dev/null 2>/dev/null - >> > then >> > ADD_CFI=yes >> > else >> >@@ -588,7 +588,7 @@ tryldflag LDFLAGS_AUTO -Wl,-Bsymbolic-functions >> > # Find compiler runtime library >> > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc && tryldflag LIBCC -lgcc_eh >> > test -z "$LIBCC" && tryldflag LIBCC -lcompiler_rt >> >-test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC -print-file-name=libpcc.a 2>/dev/null` \ >> >+test -z "$LIBCC" && try_libcc=`$CC $CFLAGS -print-file-name=libpcc.a >> >2>/dev/null` \ >> > && tryldflag LIBCC "$try_libcc" >> > printf "using compiler runtime libraries: %s\n" "$LIBCC" >> > >> >@@ -719,6 +719,7 @@ printf "creating config.mak... " >> > cmdline=$(quote "$0") >> > for i ; do cmdline="$cmdline $(quote "$i")" ; done >> > >> >+ >> > exec 3>&1 1>config.mak >> > >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-10-24 10:22 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2016-10-22 20:37 Unable to build with --enable-shared Samuel Sadok 2016-10-22 21:58 ` Szabolcs Nagy 2016-10-23 0:22 ` Samuel Sadok 2016-10-23 16:17 ` Rich Felker 2016-10-23 22:20 ` Samuel Sadok 2016-10-24 0:19 ` Laine Gholson 2016-10-24 0:28 ` Rich Felker 2016-10-24 10:22 ` Samuel Sadok
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox https://git.vuxu.org/mirror/musl/ This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).