[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Sergio Prado]

Fix the following build error:

make[3]: *** No rule to make target '-lm', needed by 'traceroute'.

Fixes:
http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/dde63672e1de1d4ba036331ab127ccc8ff044444
http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/4efb67e6a29c3dd784676d30a1051f9f0c2a6c80
http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/7ac23a3959aec22297695899c0f76dbbc4e114d3
And many more...

Signed-off-by: Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com>
---
 package/traceroute/traceroute.mk | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk b/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
index 192197498df7..a02982a6b5f0 100644
--- a/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
+++ b/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ TRACEROUTE_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+, LGPL-2.1+
 TRACEROUTE_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING COPYING.LIB
 
 define TRACEROUTE_BUILD_CMDS
-	$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
+	$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) VPATH=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/lib $(MAKE) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
 		CFLAGS="$(TARGET_CFLAGS) -D_GNU_SOURCE" -C $(@D)
 endef
 
-- 
2.7.4

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Thu, 18 Oct 2018 19:37:21 -0300, Sergio Prado wrote:
> Fix the following build error:
> 
> make[3]: *** No rule to make target '-lm', needed by 'traceroute'.
> 
> Fixes:
> http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/dde63672e1de1d4ba036331ab127ccc8ff044444
> http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/4efb67e6a29c3dd784676d30a1051f9f0c2a6c80
> http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/7ac23a3959aec22297695899c0f76dbbc4e114d3
> And many more...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com>
> ---
>  package/traceroute/traceroute.mk | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk b/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
> index 192197498df7..a02982a6b5f0 100644
> --- a/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
> +++ b/package/traceroute/traceroute.mk
> @@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ TRACEROUTE_LICENSE = GPL-2.0+, LGPL-2.1+
>  TRACEROUTE_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING COPYING.LIB
>  
>  define TRACEROUTE_BUILD_CMDS
> -	$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) $(MAKE) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
> +	$(TARGET_MAKE_ENV) VPATH=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr/lib $(MAKE) $(TARGET_CONFIGURE_OPTS) \
>  		CFLAGS="$(TARGET_CFLAGS) -D_GNU_SOURCE" -C $(@D)

We briefly discussed this patch during the Buildroot Developers
meeting, and setting VPATH clearly cannot be the right solution, it's a
big hack. A better solution needs to be found :)

Best regards,

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Thomas Petazzoni]

Hello,

On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 11:45:14 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:

> We briefly discussed this patch during the Buildroot Developers
> meeting, and setting VPATH clearly cannot be the right solution, it's a
> big hack. A better solution needs to be found :)

Looking at http://autobuild.buildroot.net/?reason=traceroute% gives
some interesting details:

 - Until May 2018, the problem was happening with external toolchains.

 - Then, there's a big gap, with no traceroute failures at all

 - Since September 11, 2018, the problem started happening again, but
   this time around, only with internal toolchains

I looked at the commits on September 10/11, but couldn't spot anything
that looks obviously related. It is also not clear why the problem
disappeared on May 2018. However, back then, it was happening only on
Matt Weber build machine. Since September, with the internal
toolchains, it is happening on apparently all autobuilder machines.

Weird.

Thomas
-- 
Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Bootlin
Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering
https://bootlin.com

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 04/11/18 12:26, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 11:45:14 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
> 
>> We briefly discussed this patch during the Buildroot Developers
>> meeting, and setting VPATH clearly cannot be the right solution, it's a
>> big hack. A better solution needs to be found :)
> 
> Looking at http://autobuild.buildroot.net/?reason=traceroute% gives
> some interesting details:
> 
>  - Until May 2018, the problem was happening with external toolchains.
> 
>  - Then, there's a big gap, with no traceroute failures at all
> 
>  - Since September 11, 2018, the problem started happening again, but
>    this time around, only with internal toolchains

 It's due to host-make, which was merged on September 8. You can trivially
reproduce by doing "make host-make traceroute" with any toolchain. The
traceroute build system overrides MAKE with make from path:

Make.rules:20:MAKE = make --no-print-directory -r


 Funnily enough, on my laptop (which has make 4.2.1 so it normally doesn't
encounter the issue), if I do "make host-make traceroute" I end up with a
different error:

make[2]: *** [Makefile:80: libsupp] Segmentation fault (core dumped)
make[1]: *** [package/pkg-generic.mk:232:
/home/arnout/src/buildroot/output/build/traceroute-2.1.0/.stamp_built] Error 2
make: *** [Makefile:84: _all] Error 2

 I guess that that is completely unrelated though.

 Regards,
 Arnout

> 
> I looked at the commits on September 10/11, but couldn't spot anything
> that looks obviously related. It is also not clear why the problem
> disappeared on May 2018. However, back then, it was happening only on
> Matt Weber build machine. Since September, with the internal
> toolchains, it is happening on apparently all autobuilder machines.
> 
> Weird.
> 
> Thomas
> 

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

 Oh boy...

On 05/11/18 16:25, Arnout Vandecappelle wrote:
> 
> 
> On 04/11/18 12:26, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On Sun, 4 Nov 2018 11:45:14 +0100, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>>
>>> We briefly discussed this patch during the Buildroot Developers
>>> meeting, and setting VPATH clearly cannot be the right solution, it's a
>>> big hack. A better solution needs to be found :)
>>
>> Looking at http://autobuild.buildroot.net/?reason=traceroute% gives
>> some interesting details:
>>
>>  - Until May 2018, the problem was happening with external toolchains.
>>
>>  - Then, there's a big gap, with no traceroute failures at all
>>
>>  - Since September 11, 2018, the problem started happening again, but
>>    this time around, only with internal toolchains
> 
>  It's due to host-make, which was merged on September 8. You can trivially
> reproduce by doing "make host-make traceroute" with any toolchain. The
> traceroute build system overrides MAKE with make from path:
> 
> Make.rules:20:MAKE = make --no-print-directory -r

 So, why does it work with native make but not with host-make? Running it with
-d tells us the following:

    Considering target file '-lm'.
     Looking for an implicit rule for '-lm'.
     No implicit rule found for '-lm'.
     Finished prerequisites of target file '-lm'.
    No need to remake target '-lm'; using VPATH name '/usr/lib64/libm.so'.

 So, while building *target* traceroute, native make finds /usr/lib64/libm.so...
That is *so* wrong. And the funny thing is, if I query the VPATH variable with
-p or with an explicit $(warning), it actually is empty...

 So for some reason, the system make has the appropriate lib directory in its
VPATH, but our host-make doesn't. In fact, the info page says:

   When a prerequisite's name has the form '-lNAME', 'make' handles it
specially by searching for the file 'libNAME.so', and, if it is not
found, for the file 'libNAME.a' in the current directory, in directories
specified by matching 'vpath' search paths and the 'VPATH' search path,
and then in the directories '/lib', '/usr/lib', and 'PREFIX/lib'
(normally '/usr/local/lib', but MS-DOS/MS-Windows versions of 'make'
behave as if PREFIX is defined to be the root of the DJGPP installation
tree).


 Muhaha. In other words, -lNAME dependencies are broken for cross-compilation!
Indeed, this is coded like this in make (remake.c):

library_search (const char *lib, FILE_TIMESTAMP *mtime_ptr)
{
  static const char *dirs[] =
    {
#ifndef _AMIGA
      "/lib",
      "/usr/lib",
#endif
#if defined(WINDOWS32) && !defined(LIBDIR)
/*
 * This is completely up to the user at product install time. Just define
 * a placeholder.
 */
#define LIBDIR "."
#endif
      LIBDIR,                   /* Defined by configuration.  */
      0
    };

... with no way to override it. So, without patching make, we're always going to
have these incorrect dependencies... The only thing we can do is to set a VPATH
so that the libraries in STAGING_DIR will be found *before* the ones in the host.

 Now, the incorrect dependencies will only affect us in case a Makefile contains
a rule like this:

foo: -lbar
	$(CC) -o $@ $^

because make will expand $^ into the vpath-expanded /usr/lib/libbar.so (assuming
we set VPATH to STAGING_DIR, but libbar.so doesn't exist in STAGING_DIR). But in
that case, we'll get a link error so that situation will be detected and the
Makefile can be patched.

 For traceroute, this isn't the case; it has something like:

LIBS := -lbar
foo: $(LIBS)
	$(CC) -o $@ $(LIBS)

so the VPATH override should work.


 Bottom line: it looks like Sergio's patch is indeed correct, and moreover, it
looks like it might be better to add it to TARGET_MAKE_ENV. Note sure if we want
to take the risk at this point to make such a landslide change?


>  Funnily enough, on my laptop (which has make 4.2.1 so it normally doesn't
> encounter the issue), if I do "make host-make traceroute" I end up with a
> different error:
> 
> make[2]: *** [Makefile:80: libsupp] Segmentation fault (core dumped)
> make[1]: *** [package/pkg-generic.mk:232:
> /home/arnout/src/buildroot/output/build/traceroute-2.1.0/.stamp_built] Error 2
> make: *** [Makefile:84: _all] Error 2
> 
>  I guess that that is completely unrelated though.

 So this is completely unrelated: it is because the way glob is used in make is
incompatible with glibc-2.28. But since any distro which has glibc-2.28 also has
make >= 4.0, it's not so important to fix I guess. OTOH it's just a simple
upstream patch.


 Regards,
 Arnout

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:

Hi,

 >  Muhaha. In other words, -lNAME dependencies are broken for cross-compilation!
 > Indeed, this is coded like this in make (remake.c):

Yes :/

At least I think that they are fairly rarely used.

 >  Bottom line: it looks like Sergio's patch is indeed correct, and moreover, it
 > looks like it might be better to add it to TARGET_MAKE_ENV. Note sure if we want
 > to take the risk at this point to make such a landslide change?

I am about to cut -rc1, so I don't want to do it on master. I suggest we
merge Sergio's patch (with the above description) and then create a new
patch for next to add it globally to TARGET_MAKE_ENV.

OK?

>> I guess that that is completely unrelated though.

 >  So this is completely unrelated: it is because the way glob is used in make is
 > incompatible with glibc-2.28. But since any distro which has glibc-2.28 also has
 > make >= 4.0, it's not so important to fix I guess. OTOH it's just a simple
 > upstream patch.

Ok, so not really that important. I'm fine with either adding the patch
or just waiting for the next make bump (that will presumably include
it).

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Arnout Vandecappelle]

On 06/11/18 11:07, Peter Korsgaard wrote:
>>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  >  Muhaha. In other words, -lNAME dependencies are broken for cross-compilation!
>  > Indeed, this is coded like this in make (remake.c):
> 
> Yes :/
> 
> At least I think that they are fairly rarely used.
> 
>  >  Bottom line: it looks like Sergio's patch is indeed correct, and moreover, it
>  > looks like it might be better to add it to TARGET_MAKE_ENV. Note sure if we want
>  > to take the risk at this point to make such a landslide change?
> 
> I am about to cut -rc1, so I don't want to do it on master. I suggest we
> merge Sergio's patch (with the above description) and then create a new
> patch for next to add it globally to TARGET_MAKE_ENV.
> 
> OK?

 Sounds good to me.

> 
>>> I guess that that is completely unrelated though.
> 
>  >  So this is completely unrelated: it is because the way glob is used in make is
>  > incompatible with glibc-2.28. But since any distro which has glibc-2.28 also has
>  > make >= 4.0, it's not so important to fix I guess. OTOH it's just a simple
>  > upstream patch.
> 
> Ok, so not really that important. I'm fine with either adding the patch
> or just waiting for the next make bump (that will presumably include
> it).

 Yes it's an upstream patch. But the make releases are relatively rare.

 Regards,
 Arnout

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com> writes:

 > Fix the following build error:
 > make[3]: *** No rule to make target '-lm', needed by 'traceroute'.

 > Fixes:
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/dde63672e1de1d4ba036331ab127ccc8ff044444
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/4efb67e6a29c3dd784676d30a1051f9f0c2a6c80
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/7ac23a3959aec22297695899c0f76dbbc4e114d3
 > And many more...

 > Signed-off-by: Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com>

Committed after significantly extending the commit message based on
Arnouts investigation, thanks.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Arnout" == Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout@mind.be> writes:

Hi,

 >  Now, the incorrect dependencies will only affect us in case a Makefile contains
 > a rule like this:

 > foo: -lbar
 > 	$(CC) -o $@ $^

 > because make will expand $^ into the vpath-expanded /usr/lib/libbar.so (assuming
 > we set VPATH to STAGING_DIR, but libbar.so doesn't exist in STAGING_DIR). But in
 > that case, we'll get a link error so that situation will be detected and the
 > Makefile can be patched.

 >  For traceroute, this isn't the case; it has something like:

 > LIBS := -lbar
 > foo: $(LIBS)
 > 	$(CC) -o $@ $(LIBS)

 > so the VPATH override should work.

I still find it a bit strange to list system libraries as dependencies
when the Makefile doesn't have any rules to create/update them, but yeah.


 >  Bottom line: it looks like Sergio's patch is indeed correct, and moreover, it
 > looks like it might be better to add it to TARGET_MAKE_ENV. Note sure if we want
 > to take the risk at this point to make such a landslide change?

I've now committed Sergio's patch with these details added to the
description, thanks for the investigation.

Notice that this particular case could also be fixed by filtering out
-l% from LIBS, just like traceroute already does for -L entries:

LIBDEPS = $(filter-out -L%,$(LIBS))

..

$(TARGET): $(OBJS) $(MOD_OBJS) $(LIBDEPS)
           $(CC) $(LDFLAGS) -o $@ $(OBJS) $(MOD_OBJS) $(LIBS)

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard

[Buildroot] [PATCH] traceroute: fix 'no rule to make target -lm' error

[Peter Korsgaard]

>>>>> "Sergio" == Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com> writes:

 > Fix the following build error:
 > make[3]: *** No rule to make target '-lm', needed by 'traceroute'.

 > Fixes:
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/dde63672e1de1d4ba036331ab127ccc8ff044444
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/4efb67e6a29c3dd784676d30a1051f9f0c2a6c80
 > http://autobuild.buildroot.org/results/7ac23a3959aec22297695899c0f76dbbc4e114d3
 > And many more...

 > Signed-off-by: Sergio Prado <sergio.prado@e-labworks.com>

Committed to 2018.02.x and 2018.08.x, thanks.

-- 
Bye, Peter Korsgaard