!PbcQeaWcgMyjVfeGQN:nixos.org

Nix Mozilla 🦊🐦🐒

177 Members
A room about a number of weird animals (also known as Mozilla products): Firefox, Thunderbird, Spidermonkey, NSS, cacert. Also a little bit of fun times, small amounts of extreme, when building weird animals. But for bugs please file GitHub issues. | Release Schedule: https://whattrainisitnow.com | Crash-Stats: https://crash-stats.mozilla.org/search/?distribution_id=%3Dnixos&product=Firefox&product=Thunderbird51 Servers

Load older messages


SenderMessageTime
19 Sep 2023
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat * firefox-bin in nixpkgs takes lots of libs including nspr and patchelfs them into RPATH. 14:12:37
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️ @nbp so uh 14:23:28
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️Any idea what "relrhack" is14:23:34
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/032b87ff55061bcbdc7a85d9e18fde814797073a14:23:35
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️That's the only sus commit I've found14:23:51
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpelfhack used to be a mechanism to re-order the symbol of the binary such that they appear in the order in which the CPU would read them.14:50:02
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpIt is possible that patchelf does not like patching binaries produced by elfhack.14:50:59
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpI do not know what relrhack is.14:51:43
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️And relrhack, seemingly, is a ... reimplementation of elfhack? Maybe?14:51:49
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbp * It is possible that patchelf does not like patching binaries produced by relrhack.14:51:52
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️Or something?14:52:14
@hexa:lossy.networkhexahttps://glandium.org/blog/?p=429714:52:39
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️Yeah I definitely suspect patchelf fuckery then14:54:14
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatBugs in patchelf do get discovered occasionally.15:08:39
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpwell, is this patchelf or relrhack?15:52:42
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️patchelf is the thing we use16:15:29
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️relrhack is the thing you (now?) use16:15:36
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbppatchelf, is the thing Nixpkgs uses to make binary lookup their dependencies with a custom RPATH. relrhack is something Mozilla recently added.16:16:44
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunat I suspect it will be more like which side is easier to fix than which side has larger blame. 16:16:52
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpvalgrind for example does not care about patchelf-ed binaries …16:18:02
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️Ideally patchelf should produce spec compliant ELF files16:19:06
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️And so should relrhack16:19:10
@vcunat:matrix.orgvcunatSure, ideally always, but you know how it often is in real life when you call things "hack" 😉16:20:15
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️Well yeah16:20:24
@k900:0upti.meK900 ⚡️So we need to figure out what's going wrong probably16:20:38
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbp"ideally" (repeated 10 times, and faster, sounds like "dali")16:21:18
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpOr to find the easiest path to fix the issue the fastest.16:21:50
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpI do not know, but maybe increasing the size of the header could be a temporary hack in relrhack, to satisfy patchelf until patchelf can be fixed.16:22:26
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbp * I do not know, but maybe increasing the size of the header could be a temporary hack in relrhack, to satisfy patchelf until patchelf can be fixed. (just a guess, I haven't look the issue deeply yet)16:22:43
@nbp:mozilla.orgnbpis there a patchelf channel where people would know?16:23:34

Show newer messages


Back to Room ListRoom Version: 9