Exotic Nix Targets | 332 Members | |
| 102 Servers |
| Sender | Message | Time |
|---|---|---|
| 19 Aug 2023 | ||
| For example
Here | 10:13:32 | |
And initial seed is populated from "bootstrap-stage0" like coreutils = bootstrapTools; gnugrep = bootstrapTools;. | 10:14:33 | |
In reply to @snektron:matrix.orgUpstream u-boot is broken though | 13:03:47 | |
| And nvme boot doesn't work out of the box | 13:04:09 | |
| https://github.com/misuzu/u-boot/commits/visionfive2-usb | 13:04:14 | |
| This has https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/uboot/cover/20230814160404.9B2E067373@verein.lst.de/ and makes nvme work | 13:06:35 | |
| 20 Aug 2023 | ||
| how does the default set of hooks (?) in the cc-wrapper make sure that the built binaries have the right rpath and interpreter? it seems that the way I have it set right now, it has set the rpath correctly but not the interpreter. | 07:25:33 | |
| * how does the default set of hooks (?) in the cc-wrapper make sure that the built binaries have the right rpath and interpreter? it seems that the way I have it set right now, it has set the rpath correctly but not the interpreter, but I never actually configured this in any way. | 07:27:10 | |
| it's in
| 12:11:38 | |
It's simplistic description is to expand each -Lfoo into -Lfoo -rpath foo. | 12:12:40 | |
| I believe dynamic linker is set inf a slightly different way: via
and later in
| 12:18:53 | |
| 13:07:46 | ||
| 17:49:37 | ||
| so if I'm getting this, that means some substitution step isn't working correctly right?
| 21:41:55 | |
| 21 Aug 2023 | ||
| Yeah, normally substitution happens in
| 05:51:19 | |
Alternatively, pkgs/stdenv/generic/setup.sh might be broken on the version of the shell you are running (if it's an old bash, or not bash) | 05:51:57 | |
idk what's up but that problem magically disappeared. new problem is that linking is being stupid. I'm getting the recompile with -fPIC errors | 05:53:30 | |
| my instinct is that this has to do with a mismatch between the compiler and linker, either implementations or flags | 05:55:12 | |
| but no amount of twiddling is fixing it | 05:55:21 | |
| (ty for the explanation though) | 05:55:51 | |
| Sounds like your
Unless you removed | 06:00:17 | |
| conservative meaning it adds it just to be safe? | 06:01:05 | |
| Yes. | 06:01:18 | |
There is normally no reason to add -fPIC when one builds an executable. There is -fPIE for the equivalent which is a little bit more efficient. | 06:02:12 | |
| hm. I'm a little confused because while compiling the failing derivation (xz) I'm seeing -fPIC in some units but not others | 06:09:56 | |
| I don't see anything related to hardening or pic or pie in that derivation | 06:11:07 | |
You will not see -fPIC option added by nixpkgs unless you use NIX_DEBUG=. The ones you see are probably added explicitly by autotools/libtool. THat's how everyone else gets correct -fPIC values. | 06:14:09 | |
| oooooooh | 06:14:58 | |
| how do I set NIX_DEBUG? | 06:17:22 | |
you can plug it into your derivation as NIX_DEBUG="1"; as another variable, or do an usual .overrideAttrs. | 06:20:11 | |