Re: Bug#757941: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-21 Thread Aurelien Jarno
reassign 754813 libc6 reassign 757941 libc6 forcemerge 754813 757941 severity 754813 important retitle 754813 libc6 version 2.19 breaks NSS loading for static binaries forwarded 754813 https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=17250 tag 754813 + upstream thanks On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 09:58:

Re: Bug#757941: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-07 Thread Matthias Urlichs
Hi, Julian Taylor: > this is already the case with regular static linking, you don't need LTO > to remove unused code, the compiler only uses those objects from that > archive that are required to resolve all symbols. > … remove _some_ unused code. Lots of code the linker pulls in from gcc will n

Re: Bug#757941: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-07 Thread Julian Taylor
On 07.10.2014 08:07, Paul Wise wrote: > On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > >> apps becomes huge in size > > I wonder if LTO would help with the size issues, theoretically all the > code from the static glibc that isn't used by busybox-static would be > stripped out of the re

Re: Bug#757941: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Paul Wise
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > apps becomes huge in size I wonder if LTO would help with the size issues, theoretically all the code from the static glibc that isn't used by busybox-static would be stripped out of the resulting binaries. -- bye, pabs https://wiki.debi

Re: Bug#757941: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Michael Tokarev
07.10.2014 08:34, Steve Langasek wrote: [] >>> Was the removal of gethostby* APIs from the static glibc intentional? > >> Yes. It's the nsswitch problem. The behavior of those APIs is controlled >> by the nsswitch mechanism (specifically the hosts configuration), which is >> inherently dynamic a

Re: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Steve Langasek
reassign 757941 src:glibc affects 757941 busybox-static thanks On Mon, Oct 06, 2014 at 07:32:17PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Paul Wise writes: > > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > >> But with jessie, for one, all network name resolution (gethostby* etc > >> APIs) don't

Re: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Russ Allbery
Paul Wise writes: > On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: >> But with jessie, for one, all network name resolution (gethostby* etc >> APIs) don't work anymore, because glibc does not provide them instatic >> libraries. So usual network utilities in busybox does not anymore, >>

Re: static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Paul Wise
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 11:27 PM, Michael Tokarev wrote: > But with jessie, for one, all network name resolution (gethostby* etc APIs) > don't work anymore, because glibc does not provide them instatic libraries. > So usual network utilities in busybox does not anymore, they just return > `host not

static linking: alternatives for glibc?

2014-10-06 Thread Michael Tokarev
Hello. For a very long time, we had a busybox variant which is linked statically, for rescue or other similar purposes (for those who don't know, busybox provides minimal implementations of varios system utilities so can be used almost alone as a replacement for whole (minimal) system). But with