Re: [PATCH v1] uml: remove support for CONFIG_STATIC_LINK

[Richard Weinberger]

----- UrsprÃngliche Mail -----
> Von: "Brendan Higgins" <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> An: "Jeff Dike" <jdike@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "richard" <richard@xxxxxx>, "anton ivanov" <anton.ivanov@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> CC: "Johannes Berg" <johannes.berg@xxxxxxxxx>, "linux-um" <linux-um@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "linux-kernel"
> <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, davidgow@xxxxxxxxxx, "Brendan Higgins" <brendanhiggins@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Gesendet: Dienstag, 10. Dezember 2019 00:02:48
> Betreff: [PATCH v1] uml: remove support for CONFIG_STATIC_LINK

> CONFIG_STATIC_LINK appears to have been broken since before v4.20. It
> doesn't play nice with CONFIG_UML_NET_VECTOR=y:
> 
> /usr/bin/ld: arch/um/drivers/vector_user.o: in function
> `user_init_socket_fds': vector_user.c:(.text+0x430): warning: Using
> 'getaddrinfo' in statically linked applications requires at runtime the
> shared libraries from the glibc version used for linking

This is nothing serious.

> And it seems to break the ptrace check:
> 
> Checking that ptrace can change system call numbers...check_ptrace :
> child exited with exitcode 6, while expecting 0; status 0x67f
> [1]    126822 abort      ./linux mem=256M

Didn't we fix that already?

> (Apparently, a patch was recently discussed that fixes this - around
> v5.5-rc1[1] - but the fact that this was broken for over a year
> remains.)
> 
> According to Anton, PCAP throws even more warnings, and the resulting
> binary isn't really even static anyway, so there is really no point in
> keeping this config around[2].

What?
Anton, please explain. Why is it not static when build with CONFIG_STATIC_LINK?

Thanks,
//richard