Syslinux - Oct 2017 - Patches from Debian

Hi Ady,

On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 22:49:53 +0000
Ady Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> Let's not forget that upstream Syslinux FTBFS when building with 
> binutils 2.27+:
> 
>  "ldlinux.elf: Not enough room for program headers"
> 
> Workaround in Debian's package:
> _ Add --no-dynamic-linker to link lines
> _ 0014_fix_ftbfs_no_dynamic_linker.patch
>  
After updating to the current syslinux development state, that patch is
no longer required (i.e. syslinux builds fine without it).  Therefore I
intend to drop the patch from Debian once I upload a new version and
have not included it in my previous mail.

Thanks & regards
Lukas

> Hi Ady,
> 
> On Sun, 22 Oct 2017 22:49:53 +0000
> Ady Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> 
> > Let's not forget that upstream Syslinux FTBFS when building with 
> > binutils 2.27+:
> > 
> >  "ldlinux.elf: Not enough room for program headers"
> > 
> > Workaround in Debian's package:
> > _ Add --no-dynamic-linker to link lines
> > _ 0014_fix_ftbfs_no_dynamic_linker.patch
> >  
> 
> After updating to the current syslinux development state, that patch is
> no longer required (i.e. syslinux builds fine without it).  Therefore I
> intend to drop the patch from Debian once I upload a new version and
> have not included it in my previous mail.
> 
> Thanks & regards
> Lukas
 
I don't know of anything in newer binutils versions that would avoid 
the building problem. Any clues?

IMHO, it is desirable for the upstream code to be relevant for multiple 
environments (as opposed to being specific for one particular OS). The 
patch in Debian has been "replicated" by other Linux distributions
that
are using binutils 2.27 or newer.

Before discarding the potential patch (for upstream Syslinux), and 
before disregarding the original building problem ("Not enough room for 
program headers"), "we" should double-check that indeed the
building
problem is no longer relevant for "anyone" (not just for Debian Sid).

Considering that most package maintainers for Syslinux-related packages 
in most of the current popular Linux distributions are either 
non-existent or not active, it is not so easy to get relevant feedback.

Bottom line: we don't really know what makes the problem go away (if it 
really goes away), but several distributions have adopted the patch 
from Debian, considering the lack of upstream code to deal with the 
building problem, "Not enough room for program headers".

Perhaps the problem goes away by updating the gnu-efi submodule in 
Syslinux? Or perhaps the changes that make the build more reproducible 
have some influence?

If there is a better solution and/or relevant information to share 
here, it would be highly appreciated.

Regards,
Ady.

On Mon, 23 Oct 2017 15:35:00 +0000
Ady Ady via Syslinux <syslinux at zytor.com> wrote:
> > > Let's not forget that upstream Syslinux FTBFS when building
with
> > > binutils 2.27+:
> > > 
> > >  "ldlinux.elf: Not enough room for program headers"
> > > 
> > > Workaround in Debian's package:
> > > _ Add --no-dynamic-linker to link lines
> > > _ 0014_fix_ftbfs_no_dynamic_linker.patch
> > >    
> > 
> > After updating to the current syslinux development state, that
> > patch is no longer required (i.e. syslinux builds fine without
> > it).  Therefore I intend to drop the patch from Debian once I
> > upload a new version and have not included it in my previous mail.
> 
>  
> I don't know of anything in newer binutils versions that would avoid 
> the building problem. Any clues?
It's not a binutils problem, or at least not *only* a binutils problem?
it appears to have been fixed:  I can still reproduce the original
"fails to build from source" if I re-compile the old version
without the patch (using the same version for all the build
dependencies).  The new syslinux version from git builds fine without
the patch.

Regards
Lukas