compiling musl on openbsd

compiling musl on openbsd

[Rashad Kanavath]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 425 bytes --]

Hello,

There was some thread on building musl on bsd. But I couldn't find them.

I tried to compile musl git(master) on openbsd 6.0 and failed .

configure and build log is attached.

uname -a
OpenBSD my.domain 6.0 GENERIC.MP#2319 amd64


configure log:
https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/54b46c95e56d91eeacec9fa5cf7859c2
build log:
https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/1f9af3fd381a2df6d8e9a1081118bfd4


-- 
Regards,
   Rashad

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1049 bytes --]

Re: compiling musl on openbsd

[Szabolcs Nagy]

* Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com> [2016-12-01 14:13:28 +0100]:
> 
> There was some thread on building musl on bsd. But I couldn't find them.
> 
> I tried to compile musl git(master) on openbsd 6.0 and failed .
> 

there is no compilation failure in the log you linked.

but musl only works on bsd with correct linux syscall emulation.

> configure and build log is attached.
> 
> uname -a
> OpenBSD my.domain 6.0 GENERIC.MP#2319 amd64
> 
> 
> configure log:
> https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/54b46c95e56d91eeacec9fa5cf7859c2
> build log:
> https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/1f9af3fd381a2df6d8e9a1081118bfd4

Re: compiling musl on openbsd

[Rashad Kanavath]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 826 bytes --]

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net> wrote:

> * Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com> [2016-12-01 14:13:28
> +0100]:
> >
> > There was some thread on building musl on bsd. But I couldn't find them.
> >
> > I tried to compile musl git(master) on openbsd 6.0 and failed .
> >
>
> there is no compilation failure in the log you linked.
>
> but musl only works on bsd with correct linux syscall emulation.
>

I don't think I have a syscall emulation in my bsd installation.


>
> > configure and build log is attached.
> >
> > uname -a
> > OpenBSD my.domain 6.0 GENERIC.MP#2319 amd64
> >
> >
> > configure log:
> > https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/54b46c95e56d91eeacec9fa5cf7859c2
> > build log:
> > https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/1f9af3fd381a2df6d8e9a1081118bfd4
>



-- 
Regards,
   Rashad

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2018 bytes --]

Re: compiling musl on openbsd

[Rashad Kanavath]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1110 bytes --]

Hi Szabolcs,

follow question: is to possible to use something already in bsd rather than
going through syscall emulation ?



On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:35 PM, Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 3:17 PM, Szabolcs Nagy <nsz@port70.net> wrote:
>
>> * Rashad Kanavath <mohammedrashadkm@gmail.com> [2016-12-01 14:13:28
>> +0100]:
>> >
>> > There was some thread on building musl on bsd. But I couldn't find them.
>> >
>> > I tried to compile musl git(master) on openbsd 6.0 and failed .
>> >
>>
>> there is no compilation failure in the log you linked.
>>
>> but musl only works on bsd with correct linux syscall emulation.
>>
>
> I don't think I have a syscall emulation in my bsd installation.
>
>
>>
>> > configure and build log is attached.
>> >
>> > uname -a
>> > OpenBSD my.domain 6.0 GENERIC.MP#2319 amd64
>> >
>> >
>> > configure log:
>> > https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/54b46c95e56d91eeacec9fa5cf7859c2
>> > build log:
>> > https://gist.github.com/rkanavath/1f9af3fd381a2df6d8e9a1081118bfd4
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Regards,
>    Rashad
>



-- 
Regards,
   Rashad

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2947 bytes --]

Re: compiling musl on openbsd

[Rich Felker]

On Fri, Dec 02, 2016 at 03:29:45PM +0100, Rashad Kanavath wrote:
> Hi Szabolcs,
> 
> follow question: is to possible to use something already in bsd rather than
> going through syscall emulation ?

A native-OpenBSD port would be a completely different target (or
rather, one per cpu arch you want to support on OpenBSD) and at
present is not terribly easy even then since the Linux syscall API is
assumed rather than using some abstraction around it. There are pros
and cons to this; at some point we might try to abstract it a bit more
to make it easier to do maintainable bare-metal ports (which would
also make it easier to port to BSDs, etc.) but even then some of the
BSDs simply lack underlying kernel APIs to implement all the corner
cases in POSIX correctly, particularly in the area of synchronization
primitives like robust mutexes, and I'm not really interested in
adding new abstractions for the sake of being able to write partial,
not-actually-quite-correct ports.

Rich