I am trying to compile a Rust program with statically linked libgcc.
The program is meant to run in initramfs in a restricted environment and is compiled for different platforms (arm, x86_64).
Currently my only solution is to compile against musl which produces a statically linked binary.
Unfortunately this adds a bit of complexity to the build process - I have not found a way to cross-compile for arm-musl on x86 and I have extra installation requirements (musl-gcc).
I have tried to add this:
[target.x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu]
rustflags = ["-C", "target-feature=+crt-static", "-C", "link-args=-static-libgcc"]
...to .cargo/config, but as far as I understand +crt-static only works on Windows, and -static-libgcc showed no effect either.
Related
I have a prepared a minimal Cmake project containing one cpp file which represent the main and one cpp file which represent the shared library, that prints basically hello world.
https://github.com/courteous/wasmELF.git
The target is to compile this miniaml code with emscripten/clang only and produce
1) one WebAssembly (wasm) binary module version 0x1 (MVP)
2) one ELF 64-bit LSB
without clearing the cmake build directory and rebuilding it again.
Currently i can successfully produce them bought by running the commands
emconfigure cmake ../ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=WASM
make
and
cmake ../ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Linux
make
However the problem is that in order to do that i need to compile the first one with Clang the to remove the build and then to do a second compilation with GCC. I would like Emscripten/Clang to produce them bought instead. I do not want to delete the build directory since the compilation times is taking too long. (Well not in this Project but imagine if the project was much larger)
What i see is that emscripten/clang selects always a target "wasm32-unknown-emscripten"
clang++ -target wasm32-unknown-emscripten
and if i understand that correctly the target should change
I do see that the project is producing LLVM IR bitcode since i have send the flag "flto"
i.e.
file TestSharedClass.cpp.o
TestSharedClass.cpp.o: LLVM IR bitcode
and in the CMakeLists.txt
set(CMAKE_CXX_FLAGS "-flto")
x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu is a supported target by emscripten/Clang
~/Projects/emscripten/emsdk/upstream/bin$ ./llc --version
LLVM (http://llvm.org/):
LLVM version 11.0.0git
Optimized build with assertions.
Default target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Host CPU: haswell
Registered Targets:
wasm32 - WebAssembly 32-bit
wasm64 - WebAssembly 64-bit
x86 - 32-bit X86: Pentium-Pro and above
x86-64 - 64-bit X86: EM64T and AMD64
In cmake i do have
SET(TARGET x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu)
however when i run
emconfigure cmake ../ -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Linux
make
i get mainTestFile.js and mainTestFile.wasm instead of ELF 64-bitcode.
what i am doing wrong here. How to tell clang to product once ELF and once wasm from the same code run without having to clear the build directory. This should be possible since clang is producing LLVM IR bitcode. Or do i understand that wrong?
https://github.com/emscripten-core/emscripten/issues/10361
OK that seems to not be possible i.e. the reply from the dev on github states that emcc or emmake can not be used with another target other then wasm32-unknown-emscripten.
I need to build a complete linux development framework for a Cortex-M MCU, specifically a STM32F7 Cortex-M7. First I've to explain some background info so please bear with me.
I've downloaded and built a gcc toolchain with croostool-ng 1.24 specifying an armv7e-m architecture with thumb-only instructions and linux 4.20 as the OS and that I want the output to be FLAT executables (I assumed it will mean bFLT).
Then I proceeded to compile the linux kernel (version 4.20) using configs/stm32_defconf, and then a statically compiled busybox rootfs, all using my new toolchain.
Kernel booted just fine but throw me an error and kernel painc with the following message:
Starting init: /sbin/init exists but couldn't execute it (error -8)
and
request_module: modprobe binfmt-464c cannot be processed, kmod busy with 50 threads
The interesting part is the last message. My busybox excutable turned out to be an .ELF! Cortex-M has no MMU, so it's imposible to build a linux kernel on a MMU-less architecture with .ELF support, that's why an (464c)"LF" binary loader can't be found, there is none.
So at last, my question is:
how could I build bFLT executables to run on MMU-less Linux architectures? My toolchain has elf2flt, but in crosstool-ng I've already specified a MMU-less architecture and FLAT binary and I was expecting direct bFLT output, not a "useless" executable. Is that even possible?
Or better: is there anywhere a documented standard procedure to build a complete, working Linux system based on Cortex-M?
Follow-up:
I gave up on building FLAT binaries and tried FDPIC executables. Another dead end. AFAIK:
Linux has long been supporting ELF FDPIC, but the ABI for ARM is pretty new.
It seems that still at this day and age, GCC has not a standard way to enable FDPIC. On some architectures you can use -mfdpic. Not on arm, don't know why. I even don't know if ARM FDPIC is supported at all by mainline GCC. Info is extremely scarce if inexistent.
It seems crosstool-ng 1.24 is BROKEN at building ARM ELF FDPIC support. Resulting gcc has not -mfdpic, and -fPIC generates ARM executables, not ARM FDPIC.
Any insight will be very appreciated.
you can generate FDPIC ELF files just with a prebuilt arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc compiler.
Specifications of an FDPIC ELF file:
Position independent executable/code (i.e. -fPIE and fPIC)
Should be compiled as a shared executable (ET_DYN ELF) to be position independent
use these flags to compile your programs:
arm-linux-gnueabi-gcc -shared -fPIE -fPIC <YOUR PROGRAM.C> -o <OUTPUT FILE>
I've compiled busybox successfully for STM32H7 with this method.
As I know, unfortunately FDPIC ELFs should be compiled with - shared flag so, they use shared libraries and cannot be compiled as -static ELF.
For more information take a look at this file:
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/fs/binfmt_elf_fdpic.c
Track the crosstool-ng BFLAT issue from here:
https://github.com/crosstool-ng/crosstool-ng/issues/1399
Can we configure gcc running on intel x64 architecture to produce binary for ARM chip by just passing some flags to gcc and not using a cross compiler.
Short: Nope
Compiler:
gcc is not a native crosscompiler, the target architecture has to be specified at the time you compile gcc. (Some exceptions apply, as for example x86 and x86_64 can be supported at the same time)
clang would be a native crosscompiler, and you can generate code for arm by passing -target=arm-linux-gnu, but you still cant produce binaries, as you need a linker and a C-library too. Means you can run clang -target=arm-linux-gnu -c <your file> and compile C/C++ Code (will likely need to point it to your C/C++ include paths) - but you cant build binaries.
Rest of the toolchain:
You need a fitting linker and toolchain too, both are specific to the architecture and OS you want to run at.
Possible solutions:
Get a fitting toolchain, or compile your own. For arm linux you have for ex. CrossToolchains if you are on debian, for barebones you can get a crosscompiler from codesourcery.
Since you were very vague, its not possible to give you a clearer answer
I have a project with dependencies on Hyper and Diesel, and because of that, on native libraries OpenSSL and libpq. The project builds on nightly Rust because it uses compiler plugins.
My current attempt is to build on a Docker container. I have the MUSL libc and the libraries make'd and installed with prefix /usr/local/musl. I run cargo with the following command: (Not sure if some of the options are redundant, I'm not too well-versed with the compiler chain, and not even sure if they end up to the linker, but I have to try, right.)
LDFLAGS="-static -L/usr/local/musl/lib" \
LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/usr/local/musl/lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH \
CFLAGS="-I/usr/local/musl/include" \
PKG_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/musl/lib/pkgconfig \
cargo build --release --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-musl
When I ldd the resulting file, it reveals this:
$ ldd server
linux-vdso.so.1 (0x00007fffb878e000)
libpq.so.5 => /usr/local/musl/lib/libpq.so.5 (0x00007f4d730e7000)
libssl.so.1.0.0 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libssl.so.1.0.0 (0x00007f4d72e82000)
libcrypto.so.1.0.0 => /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcrypto.so.1.0.0 (0x00007f4d72a85000)
libc.so => /usr/local/musl/lib/libc.so (0x00007f4d727f6000)
libdl.so.2 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libdl.so.2 (0x00007f4d725f2000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 (0x00007f4d72246000)
/lib/ld64.so.1 => /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000055e2124a2000)
There's all that dynamically linked stuff, and some even with the "x86_64-linux-gnu" chain! What went wrong?
I can make statically linked, simple pure-Rust projects without problems. ldd says that they are statically linked, and they run without problems, unlike the executable I have problems with.
When I used --verbose with Cargo, I got the following rustc command that actually builds the executable: http://pastebin.com/ywv0zNBK (Oops, that one had a custom outdir and -Z print-link-args, added by me)
Adding the print-link-args flag, I got the following linker command: http://pastebin.com/Aw43qd7h
How do I get cargo or rustc to believe that I want a static binary?
The problem was that for each crate providing a native dependency – say OpenSSL – there is the build.rs build script that is in charge of communicating the build and linking options to Cargo and to rustc. (For example: they print out something like cargo:rustc-link-lib=static=ssl which Cargo then reads and acts accordingly.)
So just setting the "standard" GCC environmental variables is hardly going to have any effect. You must check each and every build.rs separately to know how to coerce that exact crate to convey cargo its options. For OpenSSL, its env vars like OPENSSL_DIR, OPENSSL_STATIC etc.
Another hurdle is that if you use compiler plugins, they might be compiled with the target triplet too (at least docker_codegen). On the other hand, they are linked dynamically during the compiling process. This mean that not only must static libraries be linked correctly, you must also have dynamic libraries of the target host variety, like Musl libc.so in place, and correctly set (LD_LIBRARY_PATH etc.).
I made a thoroughly commented Dockerfile that builds my project statically with some native dependencies. It might be of help for others too.
https://gitlab.com/rust_musl_docker/image
If you want to statically link a Rust program without native dependencies, that is much easier:
$ rustup target add x86_64-unknown-linux-musl
$ cargo build --release --target=x86_64-unknown-linux-musl
I had the same problem with ldd and GCC. The musl target was generated in a different directory; not in target/release/... but in target/x86_64-unknown-linux-musl/release/....
I wrote a very simple ncurses program to be run in BusyBox environment. However, it seems like that I cannot get my program to compile with everything. I used:
g++ menu.cpp -ohello -lncurses --> Works fine
g++ -static menu.cpp -ohello -lncurses --> Undefined reference to SP (many times)
I found this question but it ignores linking to ncurses. I need a very single executable. My targeted environment is fixed, so I do not concern portability.
You should paste the exact compiler calls and the exact error messages that you are getting.
Do you have a static version of the ncurses library?
More importantly, do you have a static version of the ncurses library compiled for your target environment? For example your target environment may be using ulibc instead of glibc or it could even be a whole different platform (hint: tell us what your target platform is).
Are you certain that you are compiling with the right flags? The compiler flags that you are showing seem more suited to compiling an application for use in the build host environment...