DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject
         :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=a/pxbEv0kSgz6Bjy5tIYrmrj+mZibjD+tjtAeFH+rKszVDKh8G8n7En9Izt+C0lGls
         wUEuB31N9DUd/0+EkL5eAyb/ScQ7bSWJF5ghrUM7psH7tpCaJ3/ILDU1naaMPQo82XUT
         zpcYjcXW9h5KljOd5OltQTXLtFSleHIx0mYoY=
Sender: =?UTF-8?Q?Timo_Ter=C3=A4s?= <timo.teras@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4A73F5D1.7080903@iki.fi>
Date: Sat, 01 Aug 2009 10:59:13 +0300
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Timo_Ter=E4s?= <timo.teras@iki.fi>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090608)
Precedence: list
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Mark Constable <markc@renta.net>
CC: alpine-devel@lists.alpinelinux.org
Subject: Re: [alpine-devel] Attempting x86_64 build
References: <4A73EA4D.7030204@renta.net>
In-Reply-To: <4A73EA4D.7030204@renta.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,

Mark Constable wrote:
> I've got an x86_64 busybox/uclibc partition set up, courtesy of buildroot,
> and I've started building a few packages. nano built okay so I've moved
> on to apk-tools so I can obviously start to use Alpine tools to build
> and install more packages. It needs pkgconfig, zlib and openssl so I
> managed to build pkgconfig and zlib but I'm stuck on openssl because it
> needs perl and the buildroot target only has miniperl (or maybe none at
> all, not sure) so a coule of questions...

Right. Bootstrapping new buildroot is always tricky. Especially if core
tools have dependencies like this. As we've moved to the new apk-tools
stuff we've always had older "native" toolchains so it has been easy.
But we need to figure out a way to boot strap from scratch.

> . would it be possible to build openssl without using perl?

I'm not sure. I think openssl uses perl to autogenerate all sorts of
stuff; like the OID tables and some assembly code etc. So this is likely
very tricky.

> . would it be possible to build apk-tools without openssl?

Not as-is. apk-tools uses openssl for packages integrity checking:
digest calculation (sha1, md5) and signature verification (rsa).

We could very easily add "LITE" version that lacks package signature
verification and other stuff. In that version we could provide a
static version of sha1 for calculating the digest.

You do not want openssl at all in your final system, or is it
just inconvenience during the initial build?

I will talk with ncopa about this a bit. The other alternative
I see is: we modify abuild to have "install, no package" mode, so
one can first build the core packages on chroot. That way apk-tools
is not needed until later in the build process. abuild really uses
apk-tools only for updating the repository index; apk-tools does
not contain any package generation code.

> . should I drop back to pre v1.9 and use the scripted apk tools?

For experimental purposes, you might try that. But that branch of
Alpine is more or less declared dead. We will do updates on it if
there's really really important security issues. But we've stopped
the regular updates.

It'd be nicer if we got worked out the new stuff so that it is
usable to boot strap the build root.

> I've also got an Archlinux ARM chroot and managed to also build nano
> but nothing else so far as their is some problem with setting time
> in the provided glibc. If I manage to get enough x86_64 Alpine packages
> to build, to bootstrap a clean system, I'll post a tarball and follow
> the same method for ARM.

Cool.

We appreciate your work on this area a lot. Once I get some VIA
Nano boxes here, I can start working on x86_64 too.

- Timo



---
Unsubscribe:  alpine-devel+unsubscribe@lists.alpinelinux.org
Help:         alpine-devel+help@lists.alpinelinux.org
---