[Buildroot] [PATCH 1/2] openssl: support building the binary without MMU
benoit.thebaudeau.dev at gmail.com
Sun Jun 21 14:07:59 UTC 2015
Dear Arnout Vandecappelle, Thomas Petazzoni,
On Sun, Jun 21, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Arnout Vandecappelle <arnout at mind.be> wrote:
> On 06/21/15 06:45, Thomas Petazzoni wrote:
>> Dear Benoît Thébaudeau,
>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2015 12:54:33 +0200, Benoît Thébaudeau wrote:
>>> The commit 720893b62510438237b9923d744dd079ddb4f67d "openssl: disable
>>> apps for NOMMU" prevented the openssl binary from being built without
>>> MMU in order to fix a build failure without fork(). However, openssl is
>>> designed to support the lack of fork() with -DHAVE_FORK=0, so allow the
>>> openssl binary to be enabled without MMU thanks to this option.
>>> Signed-off-by: Benoît Thébaudeau <benoit at wsystem.com>
>> Hum. But then it means that we have propagated the MMU dependency to
>> all reverse dependencies of openssl (i.e packages that depend on
>> openssl), but they may no longer need this dependency anymore.
> This is only about BR2_PACKAGE_OPENSSL_BIN, which is not selected by any package.
It's indeed only about the binary, not about the library.
>> There is a fairly huge list of packages that "select
>> BR2_PACKAGE_OPENSSL". How can we find out which ones will now build
>> fine without MMU support ?
>> By the way, do you have a specific need for openssl on no-MMU
>> platforms? If so, on which platform? We don't have many no-MMU users,
>> so it's good when they speak up :-)
Actually, no. To make the full story short, I was comparing Buildroot
2011.08 to the current master, and I noticed that openssl.cnf and some
other files had disappeared in the built target files (see 2/2), and
the investigation led me to the commit
720893b62510438237b9923d744dd079ddb4f67d, which led to 1/2 here.
More information about the buildroot