Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

boost: fails to build on mpc85xx + uClibc #1621

Closed
sairon opened this issue Jul 27, 2015 · 12 comments
Closed

boost: fails to build on mpc85xx + uClibc #1621

sairon opened this issue Jul 27, 2015 · 12 comments

Comments

@sairon
Copy link
Contributor

sairon commented Jul 27, 2015

It seems that boost is not available for mpc85xx architecture, while it's available for other ones. After some searching, I found out that problem might be the same as reported in Buildroot few months ago: https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/472878/

@ClaymorePT, can you decide what to do - whether to disable failing libraries for mpc85xx or to include the proposed patch?

Also, can anyone tell me (maybe @jow-, @sbyx or @thess), where can I find what package builds are currently failing? It seems to me that buildbot broken packages page (e.g. http://buildbot.openwrt.org:8010/broken_packages/mpc85xx/) contains only results for openwrt trunk + latest packages, where boost builds fine, probably because there's musl instead of uClibc.

@sairon sairon changed the title boost: fails to build on mpc85xx boost: fails to build on mpc85xx + uClibc Jul 27, 2015
@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

I will look into it ASAP.

On 27 July 2015 at 14:18, Jan Čermák notifications@github.com wrote:

It seems that boost is not available for mpc85xx architecture, while it's
available for other ones. After some searching, I found out that problem
might be the same as reported in Buildroot few months ago:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/472878/

@ClaymorePT https://github.com/ClaymorePT, can you decide what to do -
whether to disable failing libraries for mpc85xx or to include the proposed
patch?

Also, can anyone tell me (maybe @jow- https://github.com/jow-, @sbyx
https://github.com/sbyx or @thess https://github.com/thess), where
can I find what package builds are currently failing? It seems to me that
buildbot broken packages page (e.g.
http://buildbot.openwrt.org:8010/broken_packages/mpc85xx/) contains only
results for openwrt trunk + latest packages, where boost builds fine,
probably because there's musl instead of uClibc.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1621.

Carlos Miguel Ferreira
Researcher at Telecommunications Institute
Aveiro - Portugal
Work E-mail - cmf@av.it.pt
Skype & GTalk -> carlosmf.pt@gmail.com
LinkedIn -> http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosmferreira

@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

BTW, did you try to compile Boost.Log using the regular glibc for that
target?
The report mentions a build attempt using uclibc. Does it build when using
glibc?
I would hate to disable that target due to incompatibility with uclibc.

On 27 July 2015 at 15:20, Carlos Ferreira carlosmf.pt@gmail.com wrote:

I will look into it ASAP.

On 27 July 2015 at 14:18, Jan Čermák notifications@github.com wrote:

It seems that boost is not available for mpc85xx architecture, while it's
available for other ones. After some searching, I found out that problem
might be the same as reported in Buildroot few months ago:
https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/472878/

@ClaymorePT https://github.com/ClaymorePT, can you decide what to do -
whether to disable failing libraries for mpc85xx or to include the proposed
patch?

Also, can anyone tell me (maybe @jow- https://github.com/jow-, @sbyx
https://github.com/sbyx or @thess https://github.com/thess), where
can I find what package builds are currently failing? It seems to me that
buildbot broken packages page (e.g.
http://buildbot.openwrt.org:8010/broken_packages/mpc85xx/) contains only
results for openwrt trunk + latest packages, where boost builds fine,
probably because there's musl instead of uClibc.


Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#1621.

Carlos Miguel Ferreira
Researcher at Telecommunications Institute
Aveiro - Portugal
Work E-mail - cmf@av.it.pt
Skype & GTalk -> carlosmf.pt@gmail.com
LinkedIn -> http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosmferreira

Carlos Miguel Ferreira
Researcher at Telecommunications Institute
Aveiro - Portugal
Work E-mail - cmf@av.it.pt
Skype & GTalk -> carlosmf.pt@gmail.com
LinkedIn -> http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosmferreira

@sairon
Copy link
Contributor Author

sairon commented Jul 27, 2015

I did not - but according to all the clues (OK with musl, OK on other architectures, plus the linked issue), it should be OK with anything else than the specific combination of uClibc + PPC target. The patch sent by Romain Naour fixes the issue but I can't decide whether it is an acceptable solution or just a hack.

You may also disable the problematic library only on the specific target but it'd require some refactoring of DefineBoostLibrary macro (because it does add all the libraries to the boost metapackage anyway).

@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

I'm more inclined to disable the package for that specific combination (target + uclibc).

That patch messes with the code itself so i'm reluctant in accepting it without the approval of the Boost devs. Since uclibc is an outdated lib and no longer maintained, it should be avoided whenever possible.

ClaymorePT added a commit to ClaymorePT/packages that referenced this issue Jul 30, 2015
 This update solves two issues:
 1) Incompatibility with the combination of using Target mpc85xx and uclibc at the same time[1].
   - For now, Boost is disabled when the respective combination is detected.
 2) The selection of Boost.Locale was not activating the build with full language support.

 [1] - openwrt#1621

Signed-off-by: Carlos Ferreira <carlosmf.pt@gmail.com>
@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

FYY
#1628

I decided to disable Boost for the problematic combination.
Since the issue was already reported in http://sourceforge.net/p/spirit/mailman/message/34116604/ maybe it might be solved in version 1.59. If that happens, I will then remove the restrictions.

@thess From my part, this issue is solved.

@sairon
Copy link
Contributor Author

sairon commented Jul 30, 2015

Great, thanks. It think it should be also backported to for-15.05 branch to make boost available on mpc85xx.

And I'm still hoping to receive an answer for my question if/where I can check for failing builds of CC packages.

@sbyx
Copy link
Member

sbyx commented Jul 30, 2015

@sairon release builds are done manually and usually someone will come around and open a ticket if a package is failing.

@sairon
Copy link
Contributor Author

sairon commented Jul 30, 2015

Thanks @sbyx, so it seems that boost on mpc85xx dropped off the radar...

@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

Yes @sairon. Its a matter of bug reporting, when someone hits a problem. In this specific case, it was the combination of target and uclibc.
I myself, don't use uclibc any more, due to incompatibilities with Python. Since the embedded devices to which I develop, have more than 100MB in storage, I opted to use glibc.

ClaymorePT added a commit to ClaymorePT/packages that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2015
  Major Updates
  - Added support for Python 3.5.
  - Removed the restriction for the target MPC85xx when using uclibc [1].
    - No longer required since uclibc was removed from trunk.
  - Added option to force static compilation.
  - Added option to force linking statically to the C++ standard library and compiler runtime support libraries.
  - Added option to disable multithreading support. It can be helpfull for those who wish to fully optimise their code.
    - Some boost libraries will require multithreading to be active. For those, this option is active as a requirement.

  Minor Updates
  - Added -fPIC to CFLags [2].
    - python requires independent position code.

  References:
  [1] - openwrt#1621
  [2] - openwrt#1938

Signed-off-by: Carlos M. Ferreira <carlosmf.pt@gmail.com>
@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

FYI
#1991

ClaymorePT added a commit to ClaymorePT/packages that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2015
  Major Updates
  - Added support for Python 3.5.
  - Removed the restriction for the target MPC85xx when using uclibc [1].
    - No longer required since uclibc was removed from trunk.
  - Added option to force static compilation.
  - Added option to force linking statically to the C++ standard library and compiler runtime support libraries.
  - Added option to disable multithreading support. It can be helpfull for those who wish to fully optimise their code.
    - Some boost libraries will require multithreading to be active. For those, this option is active as a requirement.

  Minor Updates
  - Added -fPIC to CFLags [2].
    - python requires independent position code.

  References:
  [1] - openwrt#1621
  [2] - openwrt#1938

Signed-off-by: Carlos M. Ferreira <carlosmf.pt@gmail.com>
ClaymorePT added a commit to ClaymorePT/packages that referenced this issue Nov 19, 2015
  Major Updates
  - Added support for Python 3.5.
  - Removed the restriction for the target MPC85xx when using uclibc [1].
    - No longer required since uclibc was removed from trunk.
  - Added option to force static compilation.
  - Added option to force linking statically to the C++ standard library and compiler runtime support libraries.
  - Added option to disable multithreading support. It can be helpfull for those who wish to fully optimise their code.
    - Some boost libraries will require multithreading to be active. For those, this option is active as a requirement.

  Minor Updates
  - Added -fPIC to CFLags [2].
    - python requires independent position code when statically compiling.

  References:
  [1] - openwrt#1621
  [2] - openwrt#1938

Signed-off-by: Carlos M. Ferreira <carlosmf.pt@gmail.com>
@ClaymorePT
Copy link
Contributor

@thess this issue can be closed. Can you do it please?

@thess
Copy link
Member

thess commented Nov 13, 2016

@sairon - Issue is over 1 yr old and uClibc no longer supported. Closing this.

If there is still any issues with the current version and target support, please open a new issue. Better yet, submit a new PR to solve the problem.

@thess thess closed this as completed Nov 13, 2016
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants