[Nix-dev] [PATCH] GNU Coreutils: Allow builds with newer versions of glibc.

[Ludovic Courtès]

---
 pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/default.nix           |   11 +++-
 pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/gets-undeclared.patch |   71 +++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 80 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/gets-undeclared.patch

diff --git a/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/default.nix b/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/default.nix
index 597ab80..9d9ea52 100644
--- a/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/default.nix
+++ b/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/default.nix
@@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ stdenv.mkDerivation rec {
     ++ stdenv.lib.optional selinuxSupport libselinux
     ++ stdenv.lib.optional selinuxSupport libsepol;
 
-  crossAttrs = {
+  crossAttrs = ({
     buildInputs = [ gmp ]
       ++ stdenv.lib.optional aclSupport acl.hostDrv
       ++ stdenv.lib.optional selinuxSupport libselinux.hostDrv
@@ -32,7 +32,14 @@ stdenv.mkDerivation rec {
     # I don't know why it is not properly detected cross building with glibc.
     configureFlags = [ "fu_cv_sys_stat_statfs2_bsize=yes" ];
     doCheck = false;
-  };
+  }
+
+  //
+
+  # XXX: Temporary workaround to allow GNU/Hurd builds with newer libcs.
+  (stdenv.lib.optionalAttrs (stdenv.cross.config == "i586-pc-gnu") {
+    patches = [ ./gets-undeclared.patch ];
+  }));
 
   # The tests are known broken on Cygwin
   # (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.gnu.core-utils.bugs/19025),
diff --git a/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/gets-undeclared.patch b/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/gets-undeclared.patch
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b6cdc77
--- /dev/null
+++ b/pkgs/tools/misc/coreutils/gets-undeclared.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,71 @@
+This patch is needed to allow builds with newer versions of
+the GNU libc (2.16+).
+
+
+commit 66712c23388e93e5c518ebc8515140fa0c807348
+Author: Eric Blake <eblake at redhat.com>
+Date:   Thu Mar 29 13:30:41 2012 -0600
+
+    stdio: don't assume gets any more
+    
+    Gnulib intentionally does not have a gets module, and now that C11
+    and glibc have dropped it, we should be more proactive about warning
+    any user on a platform that still has a declaration of this dangerous
+    interface.
+    
+    * m4/stdio_h.m4 (gl_STDIO_H, gl_STDIO_H_DEFAULTS): Drop gets
+    support.
+    * modules/stdio (Makefile.am): Likewise.
+    * lib/stdio-read.c (gets): Likewise.
+    * tests/test-stdio-c++.cc: Likewise.
+    * m4/warn-on-use.m4 (gl_WARN_ON_USE_PREPARE): Fix comment.
+    * lib/stdio.in.h (gets): Make warning occur in more places.
+    * doc/posix-functions/gets.texi (gets): Update documentation.
+    Reported by Christer Solskogen.
+    
+    Signed-off-by: Eric Blake <eblake at redhat.com>
+
+diff --git a/lib/stdio.in.h b/lib/stdio.in.h
+index aa7b599..c377b6e 100644
+--- a/lib/stdio.in.h
++++ b/lib/stdio.in.h
+@@ -698,22 +698,11 @@ _GL_WARN_ON_USE (getline, "getline is unportable - "
+ # endif
+ #endif
+ 
+-#if @GNULIB_GETS@
+-# if @REPLACE_STDIO_READ_FUNCS@ && @GNULIB_STDIO_H_NONBLOCKING@
+-#  if !(defined __cplusplus && defined GNULIB_NAMESPACE)
+-#   undef gets
+-#   define gets rpl_gets
+-#  endif
+-_GL_FUNCDECL_RPL (gets, char *, (char *s) _GL_ARG_NONNULL ((1)));
+-_GL_CXXALIAS_RPL (gets, char *, (char *s));
+-# else
+-_GL_CXXALIAS_SYS (gets, char *, (char *s));
+-#  undef gets
+-# endif
+-_GL_CXXALIASWARN (gets);
+ /* It is very rare that the developer ever has full control of stdin,
+-   so any use of gets warrants an unconditional warning.  Assume it is
+-   always declared, since it is required by C89.  */
++   so any use of gets warrants an unconditional warning; besides, C11
++   removed it.  */
++#undef gets
++#if HAVE_RAW_DECL_GETS
+ _GL_WARN_ON_USE (gets, "gets is a security hole - use fgets instead");
+ #endif
+ 
+@@ -1053,9 +1042,9 @@ _GL_WARN_ON_USE (snprintf, "snprintf is unportable - "
+ # endif
+ #endif
+ 
+-/* Some people would argue that sprintf should be handled like gets
+-   (for example, OpenBSD issues a link warning for both functions),
+-   since both can cause security holes due to buffer overruns.
++/* Some people would argue that all sprintf uses should be warned about
++   (for example, OpenBSD issues a link warning for it),
++   since it can cause security holes due to buffer overruns.
+    However, we believe that sprintf can be used safely, and is more
+    efficient than snprintf in those safe cases; and as proof of our
+    belief, we use sprintf in several gnulib modules.  So this header
-- 
1.7.10.4