On Tue December 27 2011, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> On Tue December 27 2011, Jakob Bohm wrote:
> > On 12/26/2011 1:31 AM, Michael S. Zick wrote:
> > > On Sun December 25 2011, jb-open...@wisemo.com wrote:
> > >> Merry Christmas, and thanks to Michael for pointing out a GNU gcc/ld
> > >> specific
> > >> option to do this in manually written Makefiles.
> > >>
> > >> My replies below are about how to achieve this without GNU specific 
> > >> options
> > >> and without having to edit the Configure and Makefiles.  These answers do
> > >> not apply to Windows, OS/2, DOS and other non-POSIX based build
> > >> environments.
> > >>
> > >> On 24-12-2011 05:31, grarpamp wrote:
> > >>>> 1. Make sure there is a libz.a in /lib or /usr/lib, otherwise you have 
> > >>>> no
> > >>>> static zlib to link in.
> > >>> Of course there's an old libz.a there. And it should not matter as
> > >>> we're given the --with-zlib arguments to point the build elsewhere
> > >>> for those libraries. And as seen in the report, it is following those
> > >>> pointers. It's just not using them correctly regarding being told to
> > >>> link against libz.a, not libz.so, with the 'zlib' parameter to config.
> > >> If you pass Configure and option to look for zlib in an additional
> > >> directory, all of these steps apply to that directory too.
> > >>>> 2. Temporarily remove or rename the symlink named exactly "libz.so" in
> > >>>> /lib, /usr/lib, /usr/local/lib and /zlib125/lib (This ensures it cannot
> > >>>> link to the dynamic zlib).
> > >>> No, this appears to be to be a ./config build parameter setup
> > >>> error. Why should user's break their perfectly sound systems
> > >>> in order to work around a bug? If users wanted it to link dynamically
> > >>> against libz, they would have specified 'zlib-dynamic' to ./config.
> > >> As partly explained by Michael, there is no portable option that
> > >> ./config could tell the Makefile to pass to the compiler/linker to
> > >> get the desired effect.  It simply hasn't got a chance.
> > >>
> > >> Michael's other suggestion to first use the linker to produce and
> > >> intermediary .o file with some unresolved externals is not portable
> > >> either, as only some linkers have the ability to do that.
> > >>
> > >> However a general way to achieve this on almost any UNIX/POSIX
> > >> based system is to artificially present the linker with a scenario
> > >> where the linker thinks there is no shared library version of zlib
> > >> available, only a PIC-compiled static libz.a, which the linker will
> > >> then have to use when creating an OpenSSL shared library.
> > >>
> > >> This is achieved by temporarily hiding the libz.so ->  libz.so.N
> > >> symlinks that the linker uses, but keeping the
> > >> libz.so.N ->  libz.so.N.N.N symlinks used by the dynamic linker
> > >> on your working computer.
> > >>
> > > *nix base systems (the few I know of anyway) use some variation on
> > > a ld.so.* to do the dynamic linking.
> > > As part of that approach, a ld.so.cache is built on the machine with
> > > the dynamic library links pre-resolved.
> > >
> > > You can do whatever you want with the actual links on disk of a
> > > running system, just as long as you don't rebuild the ld.so.cache
> > > until they are back into working condition.
> > >
> > > As a general precaution - have the links back to their working
> > > condition before doing: make install
> > > Since the install step of some make files will force a ld.so.cache
> > > rebuild as a 'feature'. ;-)
> > >
> > > Mike
> > Thanks, I was approaching this on a more basic level:
> >
> 
> I thought I was agreeing with you.  ;-)
> 
> My only contribution was the warning that some "make install"
> package steps might run ldconfig as part of the install.
>

With libz from the current (1.2.5) source:
./configure --prefix=<whatever> --static

Only builds the static archive but the makefile is broke
for installing only a static archive. (Oops)

./configure --perfix=<whatever>

Builds both the static and the dynamic libraries.
__BUT__ 
The "make install" also gratuitously runs ldconfig with all
output directed to /dev/null so your only clue is when
your ld.so.cache turns to trash.  ;-)

That can be avoided by:
$ sudo make install LDCONFIG=false

- - - -

And answering my own question, why we haven't heard from
the authors -
They are waiting for one of us to read the directions.  ;-)

It reads to me as if the OpenSSL archive is already setup
to handle this situation, with: no-zlib-dynamic option.

Will try that one myself next.

Mike
> 
> Dynamic linking __only__ reads ld.so.cache, so as long as
> nothing (or no one) runs ldconfig - do as you wish with the links.
> 
> > On the systems I know about (not many, sorry), ld.so.* and its caching 
> > system
> > looks at the symlinks from libz.so.N to libz.so.N.N.N, which is why 
> > those symlinks
> > tend to be included in the "runtime" shared library install packages for 
> > the system.
> > 
> > While /usr/bin/ld (etc.) looks at the libz.so to libz.so.N symlinks to 
> > decide which
> > libz.* to link to when the command line says "-lz", which is why those
> > symlinks tend to be included in the "development" library install packages.
> > 
> 
> Ah, another point I was not clear on:
> 
> --start-group <others> libz.a <others> --end-group
> not use the (also allowed):
> --start-group <others> -lz <others> --end-group
> 
> The manual only says: "explicit file name(s)" so that might allow
> full pathnames also.
> 
> The OP's question was: "How to get OpenSSL build to do this?"
> 
> I have not looked at the Makefile myself, I thought one
> of the Makefile authors would post to this thread.
> Maybe it already recognizes a: --libz-static option.
> 
> Mike
> 
> 
> > >> ______________________________________________________________________
> > >> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> > >> User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
> > >> Automated List Manager                           majord...@openssl.org
> > >>
> > >>
> > > ______________________________________________________________________
> > > OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> > > User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
> > > Automated List Manager                           majord...@openssl.org
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________
> OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
> User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
> Automated List Manager                           majord...@openssl.org
> 
> 


______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project                                 http://www.openssl.org
User Support Mailing List                    openssl-users@openssl.org
Automated List Manager                           majord...@openssl.org

Reply via email to