[OpenIndiana-discuss] When this misery end?

[Andreas Wacknitz]

You misunderstood what we tried to tell you:
http://docs.openindiana.org/dev/userland/ is not only a description on
how to be able to contribute to oi-userland but also a receipt for
building complex software
which epiphany is an example for.

The machinery behind oi-userland is exactly there to minimize the work
on building software for OI Hipster. That you will be able to
participate on the
development of OI userland is just a side effect. Creating a package
suitable for an OS is also the standard. The times of locally running
"make install" are long gone,
except for those distribution where it is explicitly part of the base ideas.

Especially for a common library like libdazzle it is not uncommon to
have both, 32-bit and 64-bit versions, in order to provide them for who
and whatever needs it.

The OI Hipster is 64-bit only but that doesn't mean that all executables
are 64-bit, too. On the contrary we have some apps that are still 32-bit
only, eg. libreoffice.

Just because you don't understand a complex system at a glance doesn't
mean that it is "weird". It just tells you that you have to learn more.
You would have similar
problems on other OS's, too, especially when you try to work against
what is intended to support you in your work.

Andreas


Am 10.01.21 um 13:39 schrieb Hung Nguyen Gia:
> I appreciate your help. BTW, your link, has nothing to do with what I'm currently trying to do. Maybe it would be useful when I could have Epiphany compiled for me and started to get it packaged on OI.
>
> What I do now is very simple: trying to build software from source. I'm not yet on the state of able to contribute it. I currently doesn't build.
>
> I make one correction: none of Epiphany or libdazzle requires gcc-10. It was me, confused, and out of idea why it failed, tried to see if it would compile with the latest GCC version. It turns out it still fails to build on gcc-10, commenting out a compiler flag on meson.build did the trick. The current trouble is no longer compilation, but linking.
>
> Not everything Sun did was right. This 'Wrong ELF Class' issue was haunted many people for a long long time. Doing a simple search with 'Solaris ld wrong elf class' will give you more than enough evidences.
>
>  From what I have read here: https://blogs.oracle.com/solaris/wrong-elf-class-requires-consistent-compiler-flags-v2
>
> Only the OI developers could handle the problem. I can do NOTHING other than waiting for them having an up and working libdazzle from the OI repo so I could just install it using pkg and continue with Epiphany.
>
> Maybe we could have a look at Linux or FreeBSD to know how to design a proper multi-lib system?
>
> We are not the only multi-lib system out there. Debian Linux and FreeBSD is an out of the box multi-lib system, but, they don't have such problem. I don't see any of their users whining about something similar than this one. Maybe we could learn something from them?
>
> I know, we inherits the legacy from Solaris. We are currently stuck with the Solaris linker. Binaries produced by the GNU ld linker is incompatible. So I'm very patient and waiting for the help from the OI devs.
>
> I hope someday Illumos in general, could get rid of Solaris compatibility and the Solaris linker, switching to a proper GNU ld linker like other systems. OI is such a small project so it can only waits for the big players to try first then upstream their changes to illumos-gate.
>
> ---- On Sun, 10 Jan 2021 17:24:55 +0700 Andreas Wacknitz <A.Wacknitz at gmx.de> wrote ----
>
>   > Am 10.01.21 um 06:55 schrieb Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss:
>   > > Unlike other systems, Illumos is a weirded platform! You have a 64 bit OS but the compiler by default will generate 32 bit binaries! The linker by default link 32 bit binaries! This has caused endless of troubles for people wanted to have their software working on your platform and the porters wanted to port software to your platform! I have asked many people, apart from the reason you are being a minor platform ('outdated', 'dead OS', 'too little market share',...) this insanity is the second reason why they all afraid!
>   > >
>   > > When would we could be as normal as other 64 bit system, when people no longer have to pass CC='gcc -m64' CXX='g++ -m64' before any configure scripts with a very high rate of failure just to have 64 bit binaries generated, I wonder?
>   > >
>   > > _______________________________________________
>   > > openindiana-discuss mailing list
>   > > openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org
>   > > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
>   > Hi,
>   >
>   > you have already been told that you should read
>   > http://docs.openindiana.org/dev/userland/
>   > and make use of what is already available. You don't need to start from
>   > scratch but can use
>   > what Sun has originally created, and Oracle for Solaris 11 and the OI
>   > team for OpenIndiana enhanced.
>   > You seem to want to take a shortpath but that won't work. Building
>   > software like epiphany is complex
>   > on any OS. libdazzle is just a step on your path of a working epiphany
>   > browser on OI and I guess it's
>   > one of the more simpler ones. We should do that in a team.
>   > I have prepared a package description of libdazzle for OI Hipster.
>   > I am reluctant to add the new library to our repository as it doesn't
>   > have a consumer in our userland yet
>   > and I am not sure whether we will need it in the future (eg. if we don't
>   > agree on adding epiphany in the future).
>   >
>   > Furthermore, as it depends on gcc-10 ant its runtime we should
>   > coordinate this with Aurélien work on
>   > changing the default compiler for oi-userland to gcc-10. We should
>   > discuss how to proceed.
>   >
>   > If you want it I can send you the sources I generated (based on the
>   > solaris-userland files). Our build
>   > system has diverted from Oracle's a bit so some changes have been necessary.
>   >
>   > Regards,
>   > Andreas
>   >
>   >
>   >
>   > _______________________________________________
>   > openindiana-discuss mailing list
>   > openindiana-discuss at openindiana.org
>   > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
>   >