Hi,
While working on the PTXdist build system we noticed that the nfs utils'
Makefile system is significantly broken when it comes to cross
compiling. After hacking the old code for some hours we had the
impression that it was so seriously broken that we re-wrote the
makefiles with the GNU autotools.
It doesn't make much sense to post a patch - this would probably be
larger than the packet itself. As a base for further discussion, here's
our version:
http://www.pengutronix.de/software/nfs-utils/
This version does the following things:
* remove all old Makefiles and replace them with proper
Makefile.am files
* tested for cross compilation
* tested for out-of-tree builds
* currently the Debian/Red Hat support is missing
(might be something for somebody who knows what he
is doing)
Any comments are welcome...
Robert
--
Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
Hornemannstra?e 12, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany
Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 | Fax: +49-5121-28619-4
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit http://www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
Use of the autotools would simplify CITI's patches for NFSv4. Is it =
likely these autotools changes will be incorporated into the package =
such that we could take advantage of them?
> Hi, =
> =
> While working on the PTXdist build system we noticed that the nfs utils=
'
> Makefile system is significantly broken when it comes to cross
> compiling. After hacking the old code for some hours we had the
> impression that it was so seriously broken that we re-wrote the
> makefiles with the GNU autotools.
> =
> It doesn't make much sense to post a patch - this would probably be
> larger than the packet itself. As a base for further discussion, here's=
> our version: =
> =
> http://www.pengutronix.de/software/nfs-utils/
> =
> This version does the following things:
> =
> * remove all old Makefiles and replace them with proper
> Makefile.am files
> * tested for cross compilation
> * tested for out-of-tree builds
> * currently the Debian/Red Hat support is missing
> (might be something for somebody who knows what he =
> is doing)
> =
> Any comments are welcome...
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit http://www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 11:33:46AM -0400, Kevin Coffman wrote:
> Use of the autotools would simplify CITI's patches for NFSv4. Is it
> likely these autotools changes will be incorporated into the package
> such that we could take advantage of them?
I'm not sure if anybody had time to review our changes yet, there was no
real feedback from the community.
If we should change the patches to make them better integratable just
drop me a note.
Robert
--
Dipl.-Ing. Robert Schwebel | http://www.pengutronix.de
Pengutronix - Linux Solutions for Science and Industry
Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686
Hornemannstra?e 12, 31137 Hildesheim, Germany
Phone: +49-5121-28619-0 | Fax: +49-5121-28619-4
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit http://www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs
On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 07:20:34PM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 11:33:46AM -0400, Kevin Coffman wrote:
> > Use of the autotools would simplify CITI's patches for NFSv4. Is it
> > likely these autotools changes will be incorporated into the package
> > such that we could take advantage of them?
>
> I'm not sure if anybody had time to review our changes yet, there was no
> real feedback from the community.
>
> If we should change the patches to make them better integratable just
> drop me a note.
Could you make actual patches instead of tarballs? (Or did I miss the
patches?)
I downloaded one of the tarballs and tried doing that myself--after
excluding automatically generated files (Makefile.in, Makefile,
aclocal.m4, compile, config.guess, config.h.in, config.sub, configure,
etc....) it was down to less than a tenth the original diff, but there
seemed to be some unrelated changes in there (e.g., some random text
files (like utils/nhfsstone/DISCLAIMER) diseappeared), and I gave up.
So, making patches would help, as would anything you could do to pare
the patches down to the minimum necessary so that we could understand
what's being changed.
--b.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training.
Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 -
digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches,
unmatched networking opportunities. Visit http://www.blackhat.com
_______________________________________________
NFS maillist - [email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/nfs