[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[James Hilliard]

Set HOST_LDFLAGS RUSTFLAGS via the host-config feature, see:
https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/cargo/reference/unstable.html#host-config

We have to enable this nightly feature first using:
CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true"

Separately set target RUSTFLAGS for the target triple specific env
variable.

Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
---
 package/pkg-cargo.mk | 11 ++++++++---
 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/package/pkg-cargo.mk b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
index f7e3f39503..439d443b0d 100644
--- a/package/pkg-cargo.mk
+++ b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
@@ -32,7 +32,10 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
 # using nighly features on stable releases, i.e features that are not
 # yet considered stable.
 #
-# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" "enables the nightly
+# CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" enables the host specific
+# configuration feature
+#
+# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" enables the nightly
 # configuration option target-applies-to-host value to be set
 #
 # CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" is actually setting the value
@@ -41,9 +44,11 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
 PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
 	$(PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV) \
 	__CARGO_TEST_CHANNEL_OVERRIDE_DO_NOT_USE_THIS="nightly" \
+	CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" \
 	CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" \
 	CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" \
 	CARGO_BUILD_TARGET="$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME)" \
+	CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS="$(addprefix -C link-args=,$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
 	CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_LINKER=$(notdir $(TARGET_CROSS))gcc
 
 #
@@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
 # and should be removed when fixed upstream
 #
 ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
-	PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
+	PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
+		CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
 endif
 
 HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
@@ -128,7 +134,6 @@ else # ifeq ($(4),target)
 define $(2)_BUILD_CMDS
 	cd $$($$(PKG)_SRCDIR) && \
 	$$(HOST_MAKE_ENV) \
-		RUSTFLAGS="$$(addprefix -C link-args=,$$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
 		$$(HOST_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
 		$$(HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV) \
 		$$($(2)_CARGO_ENV) \
-- 
2.34.1

_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
> Set HOST_LDFLAGS RUSTFLAGS via the host-config feature, see:
> https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/cargo/reference/unstable.html#host-config
> 
> We have to enable this nightly feature first using:
> CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true"
> 
> Separately set target RUSTFLAGS for the target triple specific env
> variable.
> 
> Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
> ---
>   package/pkg-cargo.mk | 11 ++++++++---
>   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/package/pkg-cargo.mk b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> index f7e3f39503..439d443b0d 100644
> --- a/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> +++ b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> @@ -32,7 +32,10 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
>   # using nighly features on stable releases, i.e features that are not
>   # yet considered stable.
>   #
> -# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" "enables the nightly
> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" enables the host specific
> +# configuration feature
> +#
> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" enables the nightly
>   # configuration option target-applies-to-host value to be set
>   #
>   # CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" is actually setting the value
> @@ -41,9 +44,11 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
>   PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>   	$(PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV) \
>   	__CARGO_TEST_CHANNEL_OVERRIDE_DO_NOT_USE_THIS="nightly" \
> +	CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" \
>   	CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" \
>   	CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" \
>   	CARGO_BUILD_TARGET="$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME)" \
> +	CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS="$(addprefix -C link-args=,$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
>   	CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_LINKER=$(notdir $(TARGET_CROSS))gcc
>   
>   #
> @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>   # and should be removed when fixed upstream
>   #
>   ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
> -	PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> +	PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
> +		CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"

  I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else, 
so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build 
even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?

  (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)

>   endif
>   
>   HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> @@ -128,7 +134,6 @@ else # ifeq ($(4),target)
>   define $(2)_BUILD_CMDS
>   	cd $$($$(PKG)_SRCDIR) && \
>   	$$(HOST_MAKE_ENV) \
> -		RUSTFLAGS="$$(addprefix -C link-args=,$$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \

  Why can this be removed? You added CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS to the target build, 
but we still want HOST_LDFLAGS in the host package build, no?

  Regards,
  Arnout

>   		$$(HOST_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
>   		$$(HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV) \
>   		$$($(2)_CARGO_ENV) \
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[James Hilliard]

On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 2:59 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
> > Set HOST_LDFLAGS RUSTFLAGS via the host-config feature, see:
> > https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/cargo/reference/unstable.html#host-config
> >
> > We have to enable this nightly feature first using:
> > CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true"
> >
> > Separately set target RUSTFLAGS for the target triple specific env
> > variable.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
> > ---
> >   package/pkg-cargo.mk | 11 ++++++++---
> >   1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/package/pkg-cargo.mk b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> > index f7e3f39503..439d443b0d 100644
> > --- a/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> > +++ b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> > @@ -32,7 +32,10 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
> >   # using nighly features on stable releases, i.e features that are not
> >   # yet considered stable.
> >   #
> > -# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" "enables the nightly
> > +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" enables the host specific
> > +# configuration feature
> > +#
> > +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" enables the nightly
> >   # configuration option target-applies-to-host value to be set
> >   #
> >   # CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" is actually setting the value
> > @@ -41,9 +44,11 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
> >   PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >       $(PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV) \
> >       __CARGO_TEST_CHANNEL_OVERRIDE_DO_NOT_USE_THIS="nightly" \
> > +     CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" \
> >       CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" \
> >       CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" \
> >       CARGO_BUILD_TARGET="$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME)" \
> > +     CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS="$(addprefix -C link-args=,$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
> >       CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_LINKER=$(notdir $(TARGET_CROSS))gcc
> >
> >   #
> > @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >   # and should be removed when fixed upstream
> >   #
> >   ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
> > -     PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> > +     PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
> > +             CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
>
>   I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else,
> so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build
> even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?

So cargo target builds tend to actually build artifacts for both the
host and the
target architecture, since cargo build-scripts are themselves written
in rust, thus
passing plain RUSTFLAGS has inconsistent behavior it seems in regards to
which artifact builds the RUSTFLAGS get applied to(seems to have changed
across cargo versions as well). Splitting them explicitly should be
more correct.

>
>   (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)
>
> >   endif
> >
> >   HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> > @@ -128,7 +134,6 @@ else # ifeq ($(4),target)
> >   define $(2)_BUILD_CMDS
> >       cd $$($$(PKG)_SRCDIR) && \
> >       $$(HOST_MAKE_ENV) \
> > -             RUSTFLAGS="$$(addprefix -C link-args=,$$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
>
>   Why can this be removed? You added CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS to the target build,
> but we still want HOST_LDFLAGS in the host package build, no?

I think this works ok since it's not a cross build like the target
build. Target builds
generate both native/and target artifacts unlike host builds.

>
>   Regards,
>   Arnout
>
> >               $$(HOST_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
> >               $$(HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV) \
> >               $$($(2)_CARGO_ENV) \
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 24/07/2022 23:06, James Hilliard wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 2:59 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
>>> Set HOST_LDFLAGS RUSTFLAGS via the host-config feature, see:
>>> https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/cargo/reference/unstable.html#host-config
>>>
>>> We have to enable this nightly feature first using:
>>> CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true"
>>>
>>> Separately set target RUSTFLAGS for the target triple specific env
>>> variable.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
>>> ---
>>>    package/pkg-cargo.mk | 11 ++++++++---
>>>    1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/package/pkg-cargo.mk b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
>>> index f7e3f39503..439d443b0d 100644
>>> --- a/package/pkg-cargo.mk
>>> +++ b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
>>> @@ -32,7 +32,10 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
>>>    # using nighly features on stable releases, i.e features that are not
>>>    # yet considered stable.
>>>    #
>>> -# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" "enables the nightly
>>> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" enables the host specific
>>> +# configuration feature
>>> +#
>>> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" enables the nightly
>>>    # configuration option target-applies-to-host value to be set
>>>    #
>>>    # CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" is actually setting the value
>>> @@ -41,9 +44,11 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
>>>    PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>>>        $(PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV) \
>>>        __CARGO_TEST_CHANNEL_OVERRIDE_DO_NOT_USE_THIS="nightly" \
>>> +     CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" \
>>>        CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" \
>>>        CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" \
>>>        CARGO_BUILD_TARGET="$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME)" \
>>> +     CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS="$(addprefix -C link-args=,$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
>>>        CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_LINKER=$(notdir $(TARGET_CROSS))gcc
>>>
>>>    #
>>> @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>>>    # and should be removed when fixed upstream
>>>    #
>>>    ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
>>> -     PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
>>> +     PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
>>> +             CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
>>
>>    I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else,
>> so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build
>> even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?
> 
> So cargo target builds tend to actually build artifacts for both the
> host and the
> target architecture, since cargo build-scripts are themselves written
> in rust, thus
> passing plain RUSTFLAGS has inconsistent behavior it seems in regards to
> which artifact builds the RUSTFLAGS get applied to(seems to have changed
> across cargo versions as well). Splitting them explicitly should be
> more correct.

  Ah, yes, that makes sense. However, this splitting wouldn't work at all if 
host target name == target target name (e.g. x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) - in 
particular, we DO NOT want to pass HOST_LDFLAGS for linking stuff for the 
target. HOST_LDFLAGS contains the rpath pointing into HOST_DIR/lib.

> 
>>
>>    (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)
>>
>>>    endif
>>>
>>>    HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>>> @@ -128,7 +134,6 @@ else # ifeq ($(4),target)
>>>    define $(2)_BUILD_CMDS
>>>        cd $$($$(PKG)_SRCDIR) && \
>>>        $$(HOST_MAKE_ENV) \
>>> -             RUSTFLAGS="$$(addprefix -C link-args=,$$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
>>
>>    Why can this be removed? You added CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS to the target build,
>> but we still want HOST_LDFLAGS in the host package build, no?
> 
> I think this works ok since it's not a cross build like the target
> build. Target builds
> generate both native/and target artifacts unlike host builds.

  I don't think it will work (when linking against C code), because I don't see 
where else the rpath into HOST_DIR will be passed. At the moment we have only 
one package in that situation I think: host-sentry-cli.


  Regards,
  Arnout


> 
>>
>>    Regards,
>>    Arnout
>>
>>>                $$(HOST_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
>>>                $$(HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV) \
>>>                $$($(2)_CARGO_ENV) \
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[James Hilliard]

On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 3:23 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 24/07/2022 23:06, James Hilliard wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 24, 2022 at 2:59 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
> >>> Set HOST_LDFLAGS RUSTFLAGS via the host-config feature, see:
> >>> https://doc.rust-lang.org/nightly/cargo/reference/unstable.html#host-config
> >>>
> >>> We have to enable this nightly feature first using:
> >>> CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true"
> >>>
> >>> Separately set target RUSTFLAGS for the target triple specific env
> >>> variable.
> >>>
> >>> Signed-off-by: James Hilliard <james.hilliard1@gmail.com>
> >>> ---
> >>>    package/pkg-cargo.mk | 11 ++++++++---
> >>>    1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> >>>
> >>> diff --git a/package/pkg-cargo.mk b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> >>> index f7e3f39503..439d443b0d 100644
> >>> --- a/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> >>> +++ b/package/pkg-cargo.mk
> >>> @@ -32,7 +32,10 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>>    # using nighly features on stable releases, i.e features that are not
> >>>    # yet considered stable.
> >>>    #
> >>> -# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" "enables the nightly
> >>> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" enables the host specific
> >>> +# configuration feature
> >>> +#
> >>> +# CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" enables the nightly
> >>>    # configuration option target-applies-to-host value to be set
> >>>    #
> >>>    # CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" is actually setting the value
> >>> @@ -41,9 +44,11 @@ PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>>    PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>>        $(PKG_COMMON_CARGO_ENV) \
> >>>        __CARGO_TEST_CHANNEL_OVERRIDE_DO_NOT_USE_THIS="nightly" \
> >>> +     CARGO_UNSTABLE_HOST_CONFIG="true" \
> >>>        CARGO_UNSTABLE_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="true" \
> >>>        CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" \
> >>>        CARGO_BUILD_TARGET="$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME)" \
> >>> +     CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS="$(addprefix -C link-args=,$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
> >>>        CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_LINKER=$(notdir $(TARGET_CROSS))gcc
> >>>
> >>>    #
> >>> @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>>    # and should be removed when fixed upstream
> >>>    #
> >>>    ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
> >>> -     PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> >>> +     PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
> >>> +             CARGO_TARGET_$(call UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> >>
> >>    I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else,
> >> so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build
> >> even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?
> >
> > So cargo target builds tend to actually build artifacts for both the
> > host and the
> > target architecture, since cargo build-scripts are themselves written
> > in rust, thus
> > passing plain RUSTFLAGS has inconsistent behavior it seems in regards to
> > which artifact builds the RUSTFLAGS get applied to(seems to have changed
> > across cargo versions as well). Splitting them explicitly should be
> > more correct.
>
>   Ah, yes, that makes sense. However, this splitting wouldn't work at all if
> host target name == target target name (e.g. x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) - in
> particular, we DO NOT want to pass HOST_LDFLAGS for linking stuff for the
> target. HOST_LDFLAGS contains the rpath pointing into HOST_DIR/lib.

Using CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS should not pass the flags to the target build
even when host target name == target target name.

We also are setting CARGO_TARGET_APPLIES_TO_HOST="false" which should
split the flags even for cases where host target name == target target name.

>
> >
> >>
> >>    (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)
> >>
> >>>    endif
> >>>
> >>>    HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>> @@ -128,7 +134,6 @@ else # ifeq ($(4),target)
> >>>    define $(2)_BUILD_CMDS
> >>>        cd $$($$(PKG)_SRCDIR) && \
> >>>        $$(HOST_MAKE_ENV) \
> >>> -             RUSTFLAGS="$$(addprefix -C link-args=,$$(HOST_LDFLAGS))" \
> >>
> >>    Why can this be removed? You added CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS to the target build,
> >> but we still want HOST_LDFLAGS in the host package build, no?
> >
> > I think this works ok since it's not a cross build like the target
> > build. Target builds
> > generate both native/and target artifacts unlike host builds.
>
>   I don't think it will work (when linking against C code), because I don't see
> where else the rpath into HOST_DIR will be passed. At the moment we have only
> one package in that situation I think: host-sentry-cli.

Oh, I was moving this somewhere else but must have accidentally
dropped it instead,
will respin.

>
>
>   Regards,
>   Arnout
>
>
> >
> >>
> >>    Regards,
> >>    Arnout
> >>
> >>>                $$(HOST_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
> >>>                $$(HOST_PKG_CARGO_ENV) \
> >>>                $$($(2)_CARGO_ENV) \
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 24/07/2022 22:58, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
>
>
> On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
[snip]
>> @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
>>   # and should be removed when fixed upstream
>>   #
>>   ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
>> -    PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
>> +    PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
>> +        CARGO_TARGET_$(call 
>> UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
>
>  I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else, 
> so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build 
> even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?
>
>  (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)

  You never replied to this. If indeed this part setting RUSTFLAGS can be 
removed, then we don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere, so this patch shouldn't be 
needed, right?


  Regards,
  Arnout


_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot

Re: [Buildroot] [PATCH 1/1] package/pkg-cargo: ensure host/target rustflags are properly split

[James Hilliard]

On Sun, Apr 9, 2023 at 1:43 PM Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> wrote:
>
>
> On 24/07/2022 22:58, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 24/07/2022 04:01, James Hilliard wrote:
> [snip]
> >> @@ -51,7 +56,8 @@ PKG_CARGO_ENV = \
> >>   # and should be removed when fixed upstream
> >>   #
> >>   ifeq ($(NORMALIZED_ARCH),arm)
> >> -    PKG_CARGO_ENV += RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> >> +    PKG_CARGO_ENV += \
> >> +        CARGO_TARGET_$(call
> >> UPPERCASE,$(RUSTC_TARGET_NAME))_RUSTFLAGS="-Clink-arg=-Wl,--allow-multiple-definition"
> >
> >  I don't understand why this is needed. We don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere else,
> > so it should be fine? Or is it because RUSTFLAGS is also used for native build
> > even if CARGO_HOST_RUSTFLAGS is set?
> >
> >  (Anyway, this hunk can probably be removed, the bug that triggered it is fixed.)
>
>   You never replied to this. If indeed this part setting RUSTFLAGS can be
> removed, then we don't set RUSTFLAGS anywhere, so this patch shouldn't be
> needed, right?

The issue still appears to be open so I'm assuming it's still needed:
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-builtins/issues/420

>
>
>   Regards,
>   Arnout
>
>
_______________________________________________
buildroot mailing list
buildroot@buildroot.org
https://lists.buildroot.org/mailman/listinfo/buildroot