uClibc success/failures/stories anyone?
ken at kenmoffat.uklinux.net
Fri Aug 2 12:40:46 PDT 2002
On Thu, 1 Aug 2002, Dan Eicher wrote:
> Ok, now I think I see what's happening. I think you don't have the
> right extra options compiled in to uClibc. I've seen linker errors on a
> few progs and would find I need to turn on C99 math or RPC and then it
> would compile just fine. I don't think this would really hurt your goal
> just turn on extra options since it wouldn't end up in your static
> binary if it wasn't needed, it would only take up a little more space on
> your host system.
No problems on the options, I think I've got these in, but I'm still at
the stage of playing with a test program - all it does is print the
version of my jpeglib header file (I had this lying around!). It's simple
enogh that it builds ok (dynamically) with more or less any uClibc Config
> Another thing I've seen is the progs are picky on how you tell them
> to compile against uclibc. Some you change just CC=i386-uclinux-gcc in
> configure, others need it as a command line option and some need the
> full path /usr/i386-linux-uclibc/usr/bin/1386-uclibc-gcc. Iptables and
> fdisk needed "CC=/usr/i386-linux-uclibc/bin/cc make" so you have a few
> options. I usually try all of them until I find one that works. There
> probably is an easy way that I don't know about and I have yet to find a
> "uClibc for unemployed art majors howto" but what would be the challenge
> in that?
Played with some options for a little while, but didn't manage a
successful static link. I'm now moving into pre-vacation-panic mode - I'll
try and play a bit more, but I've got a lot of more urgent things to do by
Actually, google couldn't find _any_ documentation on building uClibc
beyond what is in the package. I think the examples you quote are down to
the vagaries of Makefiles (compare the standard way to build bzip2 in
chapter 5 to building almost anything else in chapter 5). I suspect this
is another thing where you need to be a wizard to know what to do!
> Hopefully this will get you a little closed to your goal. I think if
> there is an easy way to convince a prog to compile against uClibc it
> would be fairly easy to make ch5 - except for gcc which is the major
> disk hog and apparently won't compile against uclibc.
> Best of luck to you,
Out of the darkness a voice spake unto me, saying "smile, things could be
worse". So I smiled, and lo, things became worse.
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe blfs-support' in the subject header of the message
More information about the blfs-support