Removing the s6 patch gives essentially the same issue:
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_write used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol byte_chr used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol openreadnclose used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol uint16_pack_big used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol fd_close used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol fd_write used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_create used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_catb used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol open_read used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol openwritenclose_suffix_internal used by
debian/s6/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libs6.so.2.2.0.0 found in none of the
libraries
dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: 43 other similar warnings have been skipped (use
-v to see them all)
This is the compilation line for libs6.so:
exec gcc -o libs6.so -std=c99 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-exceptions
-fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack
-fno-stack-protector -pipe
-Wall -fPIC -Wl,--hash-style=both -L/usr/lib/skalibs -L/usr/lib/execline
-L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -shared -Wl,-soname,libs6.so.2
src/libs6/ftrigr1_zero.lo src
/libs6/ftrigr_check.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_end.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_start.lo
src/libs6/ftrigr_startf.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_subscribe.lo
src/libs6/ftrigr_unsubscribe.lo s
rc/libs6/ftrigr_update.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_wait_and.lo
src/libs6/ftrigr_wait_or.lo src/libs6/ftrigr_zero.lo
src/libs6/ftrigw_clean.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_fifodir_make
.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_notify.lo src/libs6/ftrigw_notifyb.lo
src/libs6/ftrigw_notifyb_nosig.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_backend_cdb.lo
src/libs6/s6_accessrules_backe
nd_fs.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_ip4.lo
src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_ip6.lo
src/libs6/s6_accessrules_keycheck_reversedns.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules
_keycheck_uidgid.lo src/libs6/s6_accessrules_params_free.lo
src/libs6/s6_accessrules_uidgid_cdb.lo
src/libs6/s6_accessrules_uidgid_fs.lo src/libs6/s6_supervise_loc
k.lo src/libs6/s6_supervise_lock_mode.lo src/libs6/s6_svc_write.lo
src/libs6/s6_svc_writectl.lo src/libs6/s6_svstatus_pack.lo
src/libs6/s6_svstatus_read.lo src/lib
s6/s6_svstatus_unpack.lo src/libs6/s6_svstatus_write.lo
src/libs6/s6lock_acquire.lo src/libs6/s6lock_check.lo
src/libs6/s6lock_end.lo src/libs6/s6lock_release.lo s
rc/libs6/s6lock_start.lo src/libs6/s6lock_startf.lo
src/libs6/s6lock_update.lo src/libs6/s6lock_wait_and.lo
src/libs6/s6lock_wait_or.lo src/libs6/s6lock_zero.lo sr
c/libs6/s6_fdholder_delete.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_delete_async.lo
src/libs6/s6_fdholder_getdump.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list.lo
src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list_async
.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_list_cb.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve.lo
src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve_async.lo
src/libs6/s6_fdholder_retrieve_cb.lo src/libs6/s6_fd
holder_setdump.lo src/libs6/s6_fdholder_store.lo
src/libs6/s6_fdholder_store_async.lo
On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Buck Evan <buck_at_yelp.com> wrote:
> This is the compilation line for libexecline.so
>
> exec gcc -o libexecline.so -std=c99 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-exceptions
> -fno-unwind-tables -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -Wa,--noexecstack
> -fno-stack-protector
> -pipe -Wall -fPIC -Wl,--hash-style=both -L/usr/lib/skalibs
> -L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu -shared -Wl,-soname,libexecline.so.2
> src/libexecline/el_execsequence.lo sr
> c/libexecline/el_getstrict.lo src/libexecline/el_parse.lo
> src/libexecline/el_parse_from_buffer.lo
> src/libexecline/el_parse_from_string.lo src/libexecline/el_popenv
> .lo src/libexecline/el_pushenv.lo src/libexecline/el_semicolon.lo
> src/libexecline/el_spawn0.lo src/libexecline/el_spawn1.lo
> src/libexecline/el_substandrun.lo src/l
> ibexecline/el_substandrun_str.lo src/libexecline/el_substitute.lo
> src/libexecline/el_transform.lo src/libexecline/el_vardupl.lo
> src/libexecline/exlsn_define.lo src
> /libexecline/exlsn_elglob.lo src/libexecline/exlsn_import.lo
> src/libexecline/exlsn_multidefine.lo src/libexecline/exlsn_exlp.lo
> src/libexecline/exlsn_main.lo src/l
> ibexecline/exlsn_free.lo src/libexecline/exlp.lo
>
> I don't see -lskarnet.
>
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Buck Evan <buck_at_yelp.com> wrote:
>
>> Removing the execline patch results in:
>>
>>
>> dh_shlibdeps -O--parallel -O--autodest
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol waitpid_nointr used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol PROG used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_catb used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol env_get2 used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol env_string used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol byte_chr used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol pathexec0_run used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol str_start used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol stralloc_free used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: symbol uint320_scan_base used by
>> debian/execline/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0 found in
>> none of the libraries
>> dpkg-shlibdeps: warning: 18 other similar warnings have been skipped (use
>> -v to see them all)
>>
>>
>>
>> The manpage
>> <http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/jaunty/man1/dpkg-shlibdeps.1.html>
>> says:
>>
>> *symbol* *sym* *used* *by* *binary* *found* *in* *none* *of* *the* *libraries.*
>> The indicated symbol has not been found in the libraries linked
>> with the binary. The *binary* is most likely a library and it
>> needs to be linked with an additional library during the build
>> process (option *-l**library* of the linker).
>>
>>
>>
>> It's true that the execline.so doesn't link to skalibs.so even though it requires its symbols:
>>
>>
>> $ ldd /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libexecline.so.2.1.3.0
>> linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007ffff2dfe000)
>> libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007ff5dcf8c000)
>> /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x00007ff5dd53f000)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 3:05 AM, Laurent Bercot <ska-skaware_at_skarnet.org>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> (Please follow-up this part of the thread to the skaware mailing-list.)
>>>
>>> On 12/08/2015 08:37, Buck Evan wrote:
>>>
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/bukzor/s6-packaging/blob/dockerize/execline/debian/patches/02_link_against_libskarnet.patch
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> https://github.com/bukzor/s6-packaging/blob/dockerize/s6/debian/patches/75_dot_so_link_skarlib.patch
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Again this is because the build derps without them, but I forget the
>>>> exact
>>>> failure mode.
>>>> I'll track down details upon request.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The parts for binaries and static libraries are clearly invalid. If
>>> something breaks while building those, then there's a problem with the
>>> way the build is invoked, or the options to configure.
>>> For static libraries, -lskarnet is nonsense. For binaries, -lskarnet
>>> is already listed in the requirements ($^) and should be translated
>>> to a .a or .so by vpath resolution, so it is incorrect to list it
>>> again. Something is definitely wrong if the package builds with them
>>> while it won't build without.
>>>
>>> I'm still unsure about the shared libraries parts. I don't think
>>> it should be needed, but my test suite isn't up to par and I need to
>>> update it to test the problematic cases and understand exactly what
>>> is happening.
>>>
>>> In the meantime, please find the problem with your build and fix it.
>>> Chances are you won't need the shared libraries patch either once
>>> you've done that. :)
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems likely to me that you'll want to figure out and fix these two
>>>> issues given your response to the above patch.
>>>> Is that right?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, and now you have work to do too. :P
>>>
>>> --
>>> Laurent
>>>
>>>
>>
>
Received on Wed Aug 12 2015 - 17:18:36 UTC