[Clfs-dev] Embedded Busybox pulls wrong limits.h

[Kirk Terrell]

On 08/14/2013 05:37 AM, Martin Ward wrote:
> On 14/08/13 13:18, Kirk Terrell wrote:
>> Good Morning,
>>
>> I was attempting to build the "almost" allyesconfig for busybox 
>> (turning off RPC and selinux). I had a number of applets fail, here 
>> is the output for two of them that I have tracked down the cause:
>>
>>> coreutils/split.c
>>>
>>> coreutils/split.c: In function 'split_main':
>>> coreutils/split.c:103:6: error: 'NAME_MAX' undeclared (first use in 
>>> this function)
>>> coreutils/split.c:103:6: note: each undeclared identifier is 
>>> reported only once for each function it appears in
>>>
>>>
>>> libbb/die_if_bad_username.c
>>>
>>> libbb/die_if_bad_username.c: In function 'die_if_bad_username':
>>> libbb/die_if_bad_username.c:60:22: error: 'LOGIN_NAME_MAX' 
>>> undeclared (first use in this function)
>>> libbb/die_if_bad_username.c:60:22: note: each undeclared identifier 
>>> is reported only once for each function it appears in
>> While building the cross-tools 
>> ${CLFS}/cross-tools/lib/gcc/mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6.0/include-fixed 
>> is populated with some header files including limits.h. This 
>> directory gets searched prior to ${CLFS}/usr/include. Unfortunately 
>> the limits.h the first directory does not define the required constants.
>>
>> I ran into this with a Musl based system, but the problem should be 
>> universal? I'd be happy to submit a patch, but should the headers in 
>> ${CLFS}/cross-tools/lib/gcc/mipsel-unknown-linux-gnu/4.6.0/include-fixed 
>> be deleted, or do they need to be saved for later?
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> New BlackBerry&#174 Z10
>> Discover the BlackBerry Z10, built to keep you moving. Get it today.
>> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3341/520b75a447c5f75a32e6fst02duc
>> _______________________________________________
>> Clfs-dev mailing list
>> Clfs-dev at lists.cross-lfs.org
>> http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org
>>
> Just brought the issue of running fix includes up for the main book, 
> does disabling it fix the problem(pun intended)
>
> sed -i 's@\./fixinc\.sh at -c true@' gcc/Makefile.in
>
> regards
>
> martin
> _______________________________________________
> Clfs-dev mailing list
> Clfs-dev at lists.cross-lfs.org
> http://lists.cross-lfs.org/listinfo.cgi/clfs-dev-cross-lfs.org
>
>
rofl0r provided a reference on the issue - http://ewontfix.com/12/
There are two approaches sed the makefile and don't make the bad 
includes, or just remove them afterwards. Since I already had them I 
used the remove option and the problem was most sincerely fixed.

sincerely

kirk
____________________________________________________________
New BlackBerry&#174 Z10
Discover the BlackBerry Z10, built to keep you moving. Get it today.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL3341/520e2f081a3722f0560cast01duc