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

Alpine Linux required to build? #195

Open
AberrantWolf opened this issue Oct 7, 2019 · 7 comments
Open

Alpine Linux required to build? #195

AberrantWolf opened this issue Oct 7, 2019 · 7 comments
Labels

Comments

@AberrantWolf
Copy link

I'm trying to make the source, and it seems like the makefile is trying to run a make specifically on Alpine Linux over WSL. I don't currently have this installed. Is it a requirement? I can't find any mention of it being required in the docs or the issue tracker.

I'm still working out other build issues, but it seems like removing the Alpine specification and just using my default WSL install works fine so far.

I'm using the Cygwin install method because of issues related to #94, btw. I'm just having to keep adding new Cygwin programs and retry.

@Biswa96
Copy link
Contributor

Biswa96 commented Oct 7, 2019

Is it a requirement?

Generally, it should not be. The requirement is because wslbridge2 has a bug. When wslbridge2 is compiled with glibc statically it crashes after sometimes. You can build it in any distribution, just remove the RELEASE=1 flag which instructs makefile not to link statically.

@AberrantWolf
Copy link
Author

That would explain the random crashing I'm seeing now that I've gotten it built. Is the static linking worth installing Alpine for? (I wouldn't guess so unless it can cause instability with other processes working properly.)

@Biswa96
Copy link
Contributor

Biswa96 commented Oct 7, 2019

Can't understand the question.

@AberrantWolf
Copy link
Author

Sorry, essentially, which is your recommendation for overcoming my the build problem?

  1. Install Alpine Linux; or
  2. Remove the RELEASE=1 flag as well as the Alpine dependency

As you said, removing the RELEASE=1 flag doesn't link statically -- so I assume dynamic linkage. Another way to have phrased my question is "Do you know of any potential problems with using dynamic linking that are significant enough to justify installing a version of Linux I wouldn't otherwise use?"

@Biswa96
Copy link
Contributor

Biswa96 commented Oct 7, 2019

Understood. I mean the second one. Dynamic linking does not cause any issue with glibc or musl libc. The released binaries are statically linked because users can use any Linux distribution with it.

@mintty
Copy link
Owner

mintty commented Oct 7, 2019

If you want to run the bridge with any musl-lib based Linux distribution, you should compile it with one of them. As far as I know, there are Alpine and VoidMusl right now, the latter should work as well.
This is essential for the general wsltty release, of course, as Biswa said, and I tested only with Alpine.

@Biswa96
Copy link
Contributor

Biswa96 commented Oct 17, 2019

@AberrantWolf now wslbridge2 can be compile in any distribution static or dynamic, as you want.

@mintty mintty added the question label Nov 8, 2019
mintty added a commit to mintty/mintty that referenced this issue Feb 9, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants