swiftwasm / swiftwasm/JavaScriptKit
[SwiftBuild] Preserve duplicate archive members when SwiftBuild expands static archives for linking
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Swift
- Stars
- 986
- Forks
- 76
- Avg merge
- 21h 11m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 4
Description
Description
Follow-up from #773.
SwiftBuild's archive expansion path assumes archive member names are unique. Some static archives contain duplicate basenames, and collapsing them during extraction loses object files before the final link, which can show up as missing symbols or malformed outputs.
The attached reproducer is JavaScriptKit-agnostic. It regenerates a binary target archive with two object files that deliberately share the same archive member basename:
common.o
common.o
It then builds a static Wrapper product with both the native/control build system and SwiftBuild, and validates the produced wrapper archive with llvm-ar and llvm-nm.
Expected behavior
When an archive contains duplicate member names, every member should still be preserved during expansion for linking.
Duplicate member basenames should not cause object-file loss during link preparation, and final wasm products should link successfully when archives contain colliding member names.
Actual behavior
With swift-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2026-06-12-a_wasm, the native/control path succeeds and preserves the duplicate archive semantics externally. The native wrapper archive contains only the wrapper objects, while references to both dup_a and dup_b remain unresolved for the external binary archive:
native wrapper archive members:
Wrapper.swiftmodule.o
wrap.swift.o
native symbols include unresolved dup_a and dup_b
The same reproducer with --build-system swiftbuild succeeds as a command, but produces a corrupted libWrapper.a by expanding the duplicate-member archive and retaining only one of the duplicate object definitions:
swiftbuild wrapper archive members:
Wrapper.o
common.o
swiftbuild_dup_symbol_definitions=1
In the verified run, llvm-nm showed only dup_b from the duplicate-member archive in the SwiftBuild-produced wrapper archive.
Steps to reproduce
Updated reproducer zip: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/kateinoigakukun/ba21c654a675032aa77906877c906e53/raw/e7de0e5c875db5dbaf6a4390668ffc811ae51fa1/781-duplicate-archive-members-linux-2026-06-12.zip
The updated zip preserves the original repro.sh and includes repro-linux-2026-06-12.sh plus adaptation notes for the Linux snapshot run.
unzip 781-duplicate-archive-members.zip
cd 781-duplicate-archive-members
TOOLCHAIN=/home/ubuntu/.local/share/swiftly/toolchains/main-snapshot-2026-06-12 \
SWIFT_SDK=swift-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2026-06-12-a_wasm \
SYSROOT=/home/ubuntu/.swiftpm/swift-sdks/swift-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2026-06-12-a_wasm.artifactbundle/swift-DEVELOPMENT-SNAPSHOT-2026-06-12-a_wasm/wasm32-unknown-wasip1/WASI.sdk \
./repro-linux-2026-06-12.sh
On macOS with the original 2026-05-27 snapshot setup described in the original reproducer, ./repro.sh preserves the original invocation shape.
Swift Package Manager version/commit hash
Swift Package Manager - Swift 6.5.0-dev
Swift & OS version (output of swift --version ; uname -a)
Swift version 6.5-dev (LLVM 18d2bfb70c14d89, Swift c13d82e5987aecb)
Target: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu
Build config: +assertions
Linux swift-dev.fugu.katei.dev 6.8.0-94-generic #96-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Fri Jan 9 20:36:55 UTC 2026 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by unpacking the linked reproducer and running repro-linux-2026-06-12.sh, or repro.sh on macOS, then compare the native and SwiftBuild archive members with llvm-ar and symbols with llvm-nm. Trace the SwiftBuild archive-expansion path responsible for the differing output; done means both duplicate members survive preparation and the final wasm products link with both dup_a and dup_b present.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- swift, wasm
- Domain
- build-system
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 48/100