Re: [ptxdist] [PATCH] openssl: add dependency to libatomic

[Christian Melki <christian.melki@t2data.com>]

On 4/8/23 15:08, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 04, 2023 at 10:00:26AM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote:
>> Since openssl 3.x, libcrypto needs libatomic, at least on several 32 bit
>> platforms (and on 64 bit it doesn't harm).
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Robert Schwebel <r.schwebel@pengutronix.de>
>> ---
>>  rules/openssl.in | 1 +
>>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/rules/openssl.in b/rules/openssl.in
>> index 629ee3057..a86ca66a2 100644
>> --- a/rules/openssl.in
>> +++ b/rules/openssl.in
>> @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ menuconfig OPENSSL
>>  	tristate
>>  	select LIBC_DL
>>  	select GCCLIBS_GCC_S
>> +	select GCCLIBS_ATOMIC
>>  	select CRYPTODEV_API		if OPENSSL_CRYPTODEV && BUILDTIME
>>  	prompt "openssl                       "
>>  	help
> 
> Hmm, with ptxdist-2023.04.0, I don't get the corresponding error any
> more (and instead a reason warning that libatomic is unused). Let's drop
> this for now.
> 

atomic is going to be highly dependent on toolchain, arch etc.
unless you're going to be more specific I suspect complains will happen
in both directions. I'd be more interested why and where this pops up
than adding a blanket _ATOMIC.
Ie. I agree on the drop. :)

/C

> rsc