patchelf: Add patchelf recipe
PATCH 1/1 patchelf: Add patchelf recipe
This is useful since it allows us to edit the RPATH and interpreter fields in ELF binaries. This is potentially particularly useful in improving the way we can use the SDK and also potentially making native binaries more relocatable.
meta/recipes-devtools/patchelf/patchelf_0.8.bb new file +12 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +SRC_URI = "http://nixos.org/releases/${BPN}/${BPN}-${PV}/${BPN}-${PV}.tar.bz2" +LICENSE = "GPLv3" +SUMMARY = "Tool to allow editing of RPATH and interpreter fields in ELF binaries" + +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5b151e3c83b31f5931b4a9fc01635bfd" +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "c99f84d124347340c36707089ec8f70530abd56e7827c54d506eb4cc097a17e7" + +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=d32239bcb673463ab874e80d47fae504" + +inherit autotools + +BBCLASSEXTEND = "native"
Quoted 4 lines · Richard Purdie
This is useful since it allows us to edit the RPATH and interpreter fields in ELF binaries. This is potentially particularly useful in improving the way we can use the SDK and also potentially making native binaries more relocatable.
Long ago I had a patch series to replace chrpath with patchelf see
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib/log/?h=kraj/patchelf
can that be considered now ?
Quoted 27 lines
Signed-off-by Richard Purdie <[email protected]>meta/recipes-devtools/patchelf/patchelf_0.8.bb new file +12
-1@@ -0,0 +1,12 @@ +SRC_URI = "http://nixos.org/releases/${BPN}/${BPN}-${PV}/${BPN}-${PV}.tar.bz2" +LICENSE = "GPLv3" +SUMMARY = "Tool to allow editing of RPATH and interpreter fields in ELF binaries" + +SRC_URI[md5sum] = "5b151e3c83b31f5931b4a9fc01635bfd" +SRC_URI[sha256sum] = "c99f84d124347340c36707089ec8f70530abd56e7827c54d506eb4cc097a17e7" + +LIC_FILES_CHKSUM = "file://COPYING;md5=d32239bcb673463ab874e80d47fae504" + +inherit autotools + +BBCLASSEXTEND = "native" --_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Quoted 11 lines · Khem Raj
Quoted 4 lines · Richard Purdie
This is useful since it allows us to edit the RPATH and interpreter fields in ELF binaries. This is potentially particularly useful in improving the way we can use the SDK and also potentially making native binaries more relocatable.
Long ago I had a patch series to replace chrpath with patchelf see
http://git.openembedded.org/openembedded-core-contrib/log/?h=kraj/patchelfcan that be considered now ?
The issue is one of dependencies. We need chrpath/patchelf to relocate things like {autoconf|automake|pkgconfig}-native. Native patchelf/chrpath depend on those things to build so if we don't have it in ASSUME_PROVIDED, we get circular dependencies.
chrpath is widely available in most distros. Unfortunately patchelf is not. We therefore can't easily put patchelf-native into ASSUME_PROVIDED :(
So the reason the above didn't merge hasn't really changed, much as I'd also wish it had.
This does not stop us using patchelf for other things though (and I believe we should).
Cheers,
Richard
Quoted 11 lines · Richard Purdie
The issue is one of dependencies. We need chrpath/patchelf to relocate things like {autoconf|automake|pkgconfig}-native. Native patchelf/chrpath depend on those things to build so if we don't have it in
ASSUME_PROVIDED, we get circular dependencies.chrpath is widely available in most distros. Unfortunately patchelf is not. We therefore can't easily put patchelf-native into
ASSUME_PROVIDED:(So the reason the above didn't merge hasn't really changed, much as I'd also wish it had.
compared to last time now debian testing/ ubuntu utopic have added it as well. fedora,suse, gentoo and archlinux were never an issue. we can generate a dpkg for older debian-like distros may be ? is it worth the effort
Quoted 4 lines
This does not stop us using patchelf for other things though (and I believe we should).