Re: [PATCH] gnu: Add whois.

[ng0]

Marius Bakke <address@hidden> writes:

> ng0 <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> Marius Bakke <address@hidden> writes:
>>
>>> ng0 <address@hidden> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>> I have my uclibc-ng system not booted: When I specify libiconv in the
>>>> inputs, shouldn't it get reported by ldd?
>>>>
>>>> address@hidden 
>>>> /gnu/store/fkkvgiqa0x01j6cxipddmn7k20hax1xn-whois-5.2.12/bin$ ls
>>>> mkpasswd  whois
>>>> address@hidden 
>>>> /gnu/store/fkkvgiqa0x01j6cxipddmn7k20hax1xn-whois-5.2.12/bin$ ldd whois 
>>>>         linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffcd84fe000)
>>>>         libidn.so.11 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/sbj1kgn8bs91bn7ba9qk4n3l2rr7dxbr-libidn-1.32/lib/libidn.so.11 
>>>> (0x00007f311084e000)
>>>>         libgcc_s.so.1 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/9nifwk709wajpyfwa0jzaa3p6mf10vxs-gcc-4.9.3-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
>>>>  (0x00007f3110638000)
>>>>         libc.so.6 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/m9vxvhdj691bq1f85lpflvnhcvrdilih-glibc-2.23/lib/libc.so.6 
>>>> (0x00007f3110296000)
>>>>         
>>>> /gnu/store/m9vxvhdj691bq1f85lpflvnhcvrdilih-glibc-2.23/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
>>>>  (0x00007f3110a81000)
>>>> address@hidden 
>>>> /gnu/store/fkkvgiqa0x01j6cxipddmn7k20hax1xn-whois-5.2.12/bin$ ldd mkpasswd 
>>>>         linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffed81c7000)
>>>>         libcrypt.so.1 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/m9vxvhdj691bq1f85lpflvnhcvrdilih-glibc-2.23/lib/libcrypt.so.1 
>>>> (0x00007fc0328e5000)
>>>>         libgcc_s.so.1 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/9nifwk709wajpyfwa0jzaa3p6mf10vxs-gcc-4.9.3-lib/lib/libgcc_s.so.1
>>>>  (0x00007fc0326cf000)
>>>>         libc.so.6 => 
>>>> /gnu/store/m9vxvhdj691bq1f85lpflvnhcvrdilih-glibc-2.23/lib/libc.so.6 
>>>> (0x00007fc03232d000)
>>>>         
>>>> /gnu/store/m9vxvhdj691bq1f85lpflvnhcvrdilih-glibc-2.23/lib/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2
>>>>  (0x00007fc032b1c000)
>>>
>>> I'm guessing it silently picks the glibc one. FWIW the Gentoo ebuild
>>> does the same thing.
>>
>> That is if your toolchain is glibc based. I have no uclibc-ng or musl
>> gentoo system at the moment to check this.
>>
>>> Does uclibc-ng provide an iconv interface at all?
>>
>> Yes, but so far I wasn't able to get a response by the hardened project
>> to get a comment on their "the iconv of uclibc and uclibc-ng is horrible
>> at the moment" comment.. so I'll ask on gentoo-dev list about this, irc
>> didn't work.
>>
>>> Maybe it can be circumvented by having [libc implementation] propagate
>>> libiconv, instead of adding it as a direct input to packages.
>>
>> Possibly. I'm not yet at the point where I can build a system I like
>> with this.
>
> I'm happy to commit this package now with the changes mentioned earlier,
> if that's okay with you. Making it use an external iconv library feels
> like "premature optimization", since it works fine with what we have.

Yes, okay for me.