GNU bug report logs - #31971
meson-build-system uses 'patchelf' which fails on armhf-linux etc

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: ludo <at> gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès)
To: Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com>
Cc: Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org>, 31971 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#31971: meson-build-system uses 'patchelf' which fails on armhf-linux etc
Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2018 22:12:53 +0200

Hello,

Marius Bakke <mbakke <at> fastmail.com> skribis:

> Mark H Weaver <mhw <at> netris.org> writes:

[...]

>> I believe you're mistaken.  Those commits eliminated one of the uses of
>> 'patchelf' in meson-build-system, but there still remains a call to
>> 'augment-rpath' which uses patchelf, and patchelf is still added as an
>> implicit input.

Yeah, the reason is that implementing ‘augment-rpath’ is obviously
harder than implementing ‘shrink-rpath’ (the result might not fit.)

> Since I'm here, I'd like to point out that there has been some activity
> upstream recently around RPATH handling:
>
> https://github.com/mesonbuild/meson/commit/e3757e3d3cf24327c89dd3fc40f6cc933510f676
>
> I believe this commit eliminates the need for "shrink-rpath", and
> facilities are planned to also control the installed RUNPATH.

I don’t fully understand what this commit does, but it seems to be a
step in the right direction.

The “XXX” found in the RUNPATH of Epiphany
(<https://bugs.gnu.org/31970>) also seem to be there as a way to allow
RUNPATH to be adjusted upon install, meaning that we wouldn’t have
anything to do on our side.

In the meantime, I wonder if we can remove the patchelf dependency
selectively for packages where the patchelf phase isn’t necessary.
Epiphany may well fall into that category.

Thoughts?

Ludo’.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.