Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

glibc needs to be the same version across the Fedora base image, the SDK, and the OS #31

Closed
iliana opened this issue Aug 7, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #33
Closed
Milestone

Comments

@iliana
Copy link
Contributor

iliana commented Aug 7, 2020

Some of our build scripts are built with the Bottlerocket toolchain, but run with the Fedora glibc version in the SDK image. If we try to upgrade glibc in the OS ahead of the SDK, we get symbol version mismatches; if we try to upgrade glibc in the SDK ahead of the Fedora base image, we get symbol version mismatches.

This issue is to track unwinding the dependency of things built with the Bottlerocket toolchain on the particulars of the Fedora glibc.

@bcressey
Copy link
Contributor

bcressey commented Aug 8, 2020

We omit the build of glibc here from the final SDK, but I expect we'll ultimately need to fix it here.

One thing that might work is to define our own custom Rust targets that are copies of the "unknown" ones; part of the trouble is the "host == target" confusion that happens with the x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu triple.

That could double as a fix to #28 since the major reason why that's "hard" is that we have the same underlying confusion.

@iliana
Copy link
Contributor Author

iliana commented Aug 8, 2020

We omit the build of glibc here from the final SDK, but I expect we'll ultimately need to fix it here.

We do, but various parts of rustlib depend on the toolchain glibc. I ran across compilation errors when building the OS after bumping glibc here.

@bcressey bcressey added this to the v0.13.0 milestone Aug 28, 2020
KCSesh pushed a commit to KCSesh/bottlerocket-sdk that referenced this issue Sep 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants