On 14/05/2015 23:16, shraptor shraptor wrote:
> I even could try myself, did openssl static with musl a while ago but am not a 100%
> with what toolchain means.

I compile everything statically with musl. OpenSSL is doable; the
annoying thing IIRC is the Perl dependency at build-time, and of
course the fact that OpenSSL is a bloated monster with one security
hole discovered every year, but it can be made to work.

The best bang for your buck as far as toolchains are concerned are
the ones from Aboriginal Linux: pre-compiled, work, don't leak even
if there's a glibc on your machine. Look at
http://landley.net/aboriginal/downloads/binaries/root-filesystem/

They're uClibc-based for now; Rob is working on porting them to musl
and he says it should happen in the next release. In the meantime,
I can still link my code against musl by tweaking the musl-gcc
wrapper and the .specs file - more details on demand.

If you don't want to get your hands a bit dirty to make the
Aboriginal Linux toolchains work with musl (which is still nothing
compared to some other toolchains I've had the displeasure of working
with), the musl-cross ones, at http://musl.codu.org/ , also work -
the problem is I've never been able to find a *native* toolchain here,
so you're kinda stuck compiling for x86_64 using x86 gcc binaries.

I can't stress enough how much time the Aboriginal toolchains have
saved me. For every attempt at linking software statically with
something less demented than the glibc, it's invaluable.

--
Laurent