[Buildroot] [PATCH v7 1/9] package/patchelf: add patch for rpath sanitization under a root directory

Arnout Vandecappelle arnout at mind.be
Thu Jul 20 07:55:37 UTC 2017



On 20-07-17 08:55, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
> Hello Arnout,
> 
> Am 19.07.2017 um 23:08 schrieb Arnout Vandecappelle:
>>   Hi Wolfgang,
>>
>> On 05-07-17 18:53, Wolfgang Grandegger wrote:
>>> The patch allows to use patchelf to sanitize the rpath of the buildroot
>>> libraries and binaries using the option "--make-rpath-relative <rootdir>".
>>> Recent versions of patchelf will not built on old Debian and RHEL systems
>>> due to C++11 constructs. Therefore we stick with v0.9 for the time being.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg at grandegger.com>
>>
>>   I still have a bunch of comments, but they're solidly in the nitpicking
>> category. We definitely want this series (or at least part of it) in
>> 2017.08-rc1, so if you don't respin in time, it will be applied. In that case,
>> however, feel free to fix my nitpicks in follow-up patches. That said:
> 
> OK. I will concentrate on the important (and trivial) issues.
> 
>> Acked-by: Arnout Vandecappelle (Essensium/Mind) <arnout at mind.be>
> 
> Should I also add your "Acked-by" to the patchelf patches itself?

 No, not to the patchelf patches. That doesn't make sense, since it's
meaningless for upstream, and for Buildroot the ack is already in the Buildroot
patch.

 The Sob needs to be there because its meaning is different for the Buildroot
patch and for the package patch. For the package patch, it means "I vouch that
it's OK to distribute this change under the license of the package", and the
license of the package is different from the license of Buildroot.

> 
>>> diff --git
>>> a/package/patchelf/0001-Remove-apparently-incorrect-usage-of-static.patch
>>> b/package/patchelf/0001-Remove-apparently-incorrect-usage-of-static.patch
>>> new file mode 100644
>>> index 0000000..eda32e8
>>> --- /dev/null
>>> +++ b/package/patchelf/0001-Remove-apparently-incorrect-usage-of-static.patch
>>> @@ -0,0 +1,52 @@
>>> +From a365bcb7d7025da51b33165ef7ebc7180199a05e Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
>>> +From: Eelco Dolstra <eelco.dolstra at logicblox.com>
>>> +Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 17:31:37 +0200
>>> +Subject: [PATCH] Remove apparently incorrect usage of "static"
>>
>>   I was going to say: we don't really need this patch. However, we do need it
>> because it removes the DT_INIT symbols from needed_libs (DT_INIT points to
>> library initialisation function, not to needed libraries...). So perhaps that
>> bit should be added to the patch message.
> 
> Added to the [] comment. I think the original messages should bot be touched.

 ACK that.

> 
>>> +
>>> +[Upstream-commit:
>>> https://github.com/NixOS/patchelf/commit/a365bcb7d7025da51b33165ef7ebc7180199a05e]
>>>
>>> +Signed-off-by: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg at grandegger.com>
>>> +
>>> +---
>>> + src/patchelf.cc | 8 +++-----
>>> + 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>>> +
>>> +Index: patchelf-0.9.old/src/patchelf.cc
>>
>>   Looks like you didn't really generate this with git-format-patch, although the
>> header looks like it... It's not very important, but we really like to be able
>> to regenerate exactly the same patches with the following procedure:
>>
>> cd patchelf
>> git checkout -b buildroot 0.9
>> git am ../buildroot/package/patchelf/*.patch
>> git format-patch -N --no-renames -o ../buildroot/package/patchelf 0.9..
> 
> This is generate with quilt against patchelf-0.9.tag.bz2. Will fix.

 Ah, that makes sense as well. Again, it's not very important. Do you find using
quilt to manage package patches easier than using git?

 Regards,
 Arnout

[snip]
-- 
Arnout Vandecappelle                          arnout at mind be
Senior Embedded Software Architect            +32-16-286500
Essensium/Mind                                http://www.mind.be
G.Geenslaan 9, 3001 Leuven, Belgium           BE 872 984 063 RPR Leuven
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/arnoutvandecappelle
GPG fingerprint:  7493 020B C7E3 8618 8DEC 222C 82EB F404 F9AC 0DDF



More information about the buildroot mailing list