Re: [PATCH] systemd: Fix build on musl

["Luca Bocassi" <luca.boccassi@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2393 bytes --]

On Thu, 2021-07-29 at 12:59 +0000, Khem Raj wrote:
> 
> Latest upgrade to 249 broke a working build on musl, this is incremental
> fix to exisiting patches adapted to 249 release
> 
> Signed-off-by: Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>
> Cc: Luca Boccassi <luca.boccassi@microsoft.com>
> ---
>  ...002-don-t-use-glibc-specific-qsort_r.patch |  24 +--
>  ...missing.h-check-for-missing-strndupa.patch | 173 +++++++++---------
>  .../0006-Include-netinet-if_ether.h.patch     | 147 ++++++++-------
>  ...OB_BRACE-and-GLOB_ALTDIRFUNC-is-not-.patch |  20 +-
>  ...T_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch |  14 +-
>  ...-not-disable-buffer-in-writing-files.patch | 143 ++++++---------
>  .../systemd/0026-Handle-missing-gshadow.patch |  18 +-
>  7 files changed, 247 insertions(+), 292 deletions(-)
> 

Having a look at the patches, a few comments:

- 0001-test-parse-argument-Include-signal.h.patch was merged upstream,
but never removed, I think because it was refactored so it applies
cleanly and doesn't raise errors?

- 0005-src-basic-missing.h-check-for-missing-strndupa.patch this is
massive and will keep growing and breaking the build, wouldn't it be
better to just implement strndupa in musl? Even out-of-tree it sounds
like it would be easier to maintain than this

- 0006-Include-netinet-if_ether.h.patch sounds like it should be doable
in a way that is compatible with both glibc and musl, and thus could be
upstreamed?

- 0010-Use-uintmax_t-for-handling-rlim_t.patch can be upstreamed but
needs to be reworked slightly as explained in 
https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/7199#issuecomment-358268647
which seems worth doing to me

- 0012-don-t-pass-AT_SYMLINK_NOFOLLOW-flag-to-faccessat.patch I find
quite worrying, as it fundamentally changes access patterns, some of
which are done for security reasons. At best, this will cause
completely different runtime behaviours for the same filesystem
depending on the libc implementation, which doesn't sound great?

- 0016-Hide-__start_BUS_ERROR_MAP-and-__stop_BUS_ERROR_MAP.patch sounds
like a genuine bug, have you tried upstreaming it?

- 0019-Handle-missing-LOCK_EX.patch I see no problem upstreaming this

- 0028-missing_syscall.h-Define-MIPS-ABI-defines-for-musl.patch should
also be fine to upstream I think, in src/basic/missing_syscall_def.h

-- 
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 849 bytes --]