[oe] [meta-networking][PATCH 1/1] mdns: move from meta-intel-iot-middleware

[Khem Raj]

On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Andre McCurdy <armccurdy at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Joe MacDonald
> <Joe_MacDonald at mentor.com> wrote:
>> [Re: [oe] [meta-networking][PATCH 1/1] mdns: move from meta-intel-iot-middleware] On 17.10.17 (Tue 10:01) Khem Raj wrote:
>>> I do world builds on master-next with musl on qemumips and rpi3
>>> continuously, with a known set of failures, if a new one shows up
>>> I tend to report.
>>
>> I obviously haven't been building with musl either, but if it's not that
>> difficult to add to my autobuilder configuration, I'd be happy to.  Is
>> https://github.com/kraj/meta-musl/blob/master/README.md the best source
>> for how to get started with a musl build?
>
> Going slightly off topic, but even though sources can be patched to
> fix build issues due to musl's lack of nss.h, it doesn't really make
> any sense to build nss modules for musl, since these modules can only
> ever be used by glibc.
>
> e.g. we have musl patches in recipes such as nss-myhostname, but the
> real fix is probably just to not build the recipe at all for musl.
>
> In this particular case I don't know whether mDNSResponder is tied
> tightly to nss or whether the nss module is an optional add-on but
> that should probably be determined before coming up with fix.

yes musl does not have nss and its intentional. Although mDNS can be
implemented external to libc which I believe is a good thing. I would be
happy if the patches to add these recipes relying on nss just added musl
to incompatible hosts for immediate OE concerns. Eventually, it could have
a different fix upstream for the given component, if they want to make
nss support conditional or otherwise, its best left to component