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

Statically link linkerd-await #418

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

kflynn
Copy link
Member

@kflynn kflynn commented Dec 20, 2023

Signed-off-by: Flynn [email protected]

@@ -149,7 +149,7 @@ test *flags:

# Build linkerd-await
build:
{{ _cargo }} build --frozen --target={{ _cargo_target }} \
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think that this is enough to safely distribute a binary. As I search around, I find a bunch of information suggesting that there are problems statically linking against glibc. However, we have prior art for linking against musl:

https://github.com/linkerd/linkerd2/blob/b16f3f0825b8639b889501cb24583cb9d3d22002/policy-controller/Dockerfile#L13-L22

https://github.com/olix0r/hokay/blob/ad64b990bf70cebbe939d5a6e81d16ac837ce443/.github/workflows/release.yml#L56-L150

This requires some CI surgery, but I can port one of these over.

Before doing that, though, I want to confirm that the original problem we're solving can't be more easily solved by rebuilding the binaries against a newer version of glibc.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah. It looks like distributing binaries statically linked against GNU libc (LGPLv2.1) may have licensing implications, the extent of which I do not immediately understand.

@olix0r
Copy link
Member

olix0r commented May 16, 2024

Superseded by 9066973

@olix0r olix0r closed this May 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants