Date: Fri, 01 Sep 2023 19:11:58 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net> To: ports@freebsd.org, emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Building a Linuxulator userland from source Message-ID: <03b7f828f3fbc3c203fc885baf6b9db1@Leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <d3xyk4axjo2j5xctsoolmfdbq6zk6bs3r6dbhs4dnmfjgvhj6t@zy3fuy2yyt4e> References: <xcztahm3vu3bjghjqqxuoy2xabyjmyfq22jw6mkaaaqo7wa36s@fdq7dlvpuhlk> <i3kr2kukjwgw2xvjlzgshwe72bjpnln4lvl7prhk77nelzidm6@2g56zi3ku7ec> <d3xyk4axjo2j5xctsoolmfdbq6zk6bs3r6dbhs4dnmfjgvhj6t@zy3fuy2yyt4e>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 2023-09-01 16:55, schrieb Felix Palmen: > * Felix Palmen <zirias@freebsd.org> [20230820 12:35]: >> Just a little update on this [...] > > Posting yet another status update because I'm about to reach a > "milestone": I just had the first successful build of ffmpeg. I focused > on ffmpeg because that's a requirement for MakeMKV which I now intend > to > use as a first PoC for the new userland. Before proceeding there, doing > test builds now on all supported architectures and FreeBSD versions, so > I'll have to wait quite a while ;) > > The new Linux ffmpeg port has almost everything enabled that's in the > default options of the FreeBSD ffmpeg port. I just left out very few > things that seemed *too* complex right now, like e.g. Vulkan. > > To get there, I created a total of 150 ports now. Still, test-building > this ffmpeg "only" wants to build 124 ports, probably because of Xorg > libraries, once I noticed I need them, I created ports for *all* of > them. > > A selection of what I added: > > * Languages: TCL, Python, Perl > * Build systems: autoreconf, cmake, meson, ninja (all usable with their > standard USES, my new USES adjusts what's needed to do Linux builds) > * Lots of "codec" libs: lame, opus, ogg/vorbis, vpx, x264, x265, ... > * Infrastructure libs like libdrm, libglvnd, alsa, v4l, ... Infrastructure ports are what we provide in the linux base ports. So I'm not surprised... :) > A first takeaway could be that indeed, this will be kind of yet another > Linux distribution, as mentioned in sceptical responses so far. I still > hope it will be possible to limit the scope, we'd only need ports > providing shared libraries that (closed-source or otherwise not > portable) Linux software would need to run in Linuxulator. That said, > there's probably still a lot missing, like e.g mesa-dri (for games and > similar), gtk3/gtk4/qt5 (for GUI apps that aren't statically linked), > and so on. Are you already taking into account the fall-through of config files to FreeBSD native config files? This is the main difference between a linux distribution (linux_dist ports) and a linux base for FreeBSD. Another difference may be to only compile the libs instead of the binaries (e.g. the linux libmp3lame.so would be needed by software, but the FreeBSD lame executable could be used). > There were almost no surprising build issues so far (so, I guess > accidentally pulling in things from FreeBSD base really isn't a thing, > at least not when building in poudriere), except for one: It seems a > "relative" rpath (using $ORIGIN) doesn't work. To work around this with > one port using that during build, I had to add some explicit > LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Only for the build, or also for running/executing afterwards? Bye, Alexander. -- http://www.Leidinger.net Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?03b7f828f3fbc3c203fc885baf6b9db1>