You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by David Jones <os...@gmail.com> on 2007/01/24 16:08:55 UTC

link failure from buildmark

zOS needs to compile with extra CFLAGS in order to link correctly.
After revisions 153273/153266 to ./Makefile.in all compile and link flags
are lost as
buildmark.c is made without them: PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(COMPILE)
$(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c


zOS LIBTOOL does add the needed flags, so a solution for zOS is below. Seems
to work on linux, too.
Any comments for other/better/generic approaches?


--- Makefile.in.orig Wed Jan 17 14:00:11 2007
+++ Makefile.in Thu Jan 18 09:17:17 2007
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@

PROGRAM_NAME = $(progname)
PROGRAM_SOURCES = modules.c
-PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.o $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES) $()
-PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(COMPILE) $(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c
+PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.lo $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES) $)
+PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(LIBTOOL) --mode=compile $(COMPILE) -c $(top_srcdir)/c
PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES = \
server/libmain.la \
$(BUILTIN_LIBS) \

Note: Can't use $(LT_COMPILE) directly instead of $(LIBTOOL) as
rules.mkuses parms '-c $< && touch $@'
which get in the way.

--
David Jones
oscaremma@gmail.com <os...@yahoo.com>

Re: link failure from buildmark

Posted by David Jones <os...@gmail.com>.
Sorry, not sure what happened, here is an unmangled diff:

>svn diff Makefile.in <http://makefile.in/>
Index: Makefile.in <http://makefile.in/>
===================================================================
--- Makefile.in <http://makefile.in/> (revision 494665)
+++ Makefile.in <http://makefile.in/> (working copy)
@@ -4,8 +4,8 @@

 PROGRAM_NAME         = $(progname)
 PROGRAM_SOURCES      = modules.c
-PROGRAM_LDADD        = buildmark.o $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES)
$(EXTRA_LIBS) $(AP_LIBS) $(LIBS)
-PROGRAM_PRELINK      = $(COMPILE) -c $(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c
+PROGRAM_LDADD        = buildmark.lo $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS)
$(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES) $(EXTRA_LIBS) $(AP_LIBS) $(LIBS)
+PROGRAM_PRELINK      = $(LIBTOOL) --mode=compile $(COMPILE)  -c
$(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c
 PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES = \
   server/libmain.la \
   $(BUILTIN_LIBS) \

On 1/26/07, Greg Ames <am...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> --- David Jones <os...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > zOS needs to compile with extra CFLAGS in order to link correctly.
> > After revisions 153273/153266 to ./Makefile.in all compile and link
> flags
> > are lost as
> > buildmark.c is made without them:
>
> concept sounds fine but...
>
> > --- Makefile.in.orig Wed Jan 17 14:00:11 2007
> > +++ Makefile.in Thu Jan 18 09:17:17 2007
> > @@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
> >
> > PROGRAM_NAME = $(progname)
> > PROGRAM_SOURCES = modules.c
> > -PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.o $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES)
> $()
> > -PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(COMPILE) $(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c
> > +PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.lo $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES)
> $)
>                                                                          ^
> what happened here?                               >>---------------------+
>
> > +PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(LIBTOOL) --mode=compile $(COMPILE) -c
> $(top_srcdir)/c
>
> do we have a file named "c" in $(top_srcdir) ?  how does this do the job
> with
> buildmark?
>
> maybe cut-n-pasto's or funky email clients explain both?
>
> Greg
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Yahoo! Music Unlimited
> Access over 1 million songs.
> http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
> Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
> http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html
>

Re: link failure from buildmark

Posted by Greg Ames <am...@yahoo.com>.
--- David Jones <os...@gmail.com> wrote:

> zOS needs to compile with extra CFLAGS in order to link correctly.
> After revisions 153273/153266 to ./Makefile.in all compile and link flags
> are lost as
> buildmark.c is made without them: 

concept sounds fine but...

> --- Makefile.in.orig Wed Jan 17 14:00:11 2007
> +++ Makefile.in Thu Jan 18 09:17:17 2007
> @@ -4,8 +4,8 @@
> 
> PROGRAM_NAME = $(progname)
> PROGRAM_SOURCES = modules.c
> -PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.o $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES) $()
> -PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(COMPILE) $(top_srcdir)/server/buildmark.c
> +PROGRAM_LDADD = buildmark.lo $(HTTPD_LDFLAGS) $(PROGRAM_DEPENDENCIES) $)
                                                                         ^
what happened here?                               >>---------------------+

> +PROGRAM_PRELINK = $(LIBTOOL) --mode=compile $(COMPILE) -c $(top_srcdir)/c

do we have a file named "c" in $(top_srcdir) ?  how does this do the job with
buildmark?

maybe cut-n-pasto's or funky email clients explain both?

Greg


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Music Unlimited
Access over 1 million songs.
http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check. 
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.
http://advision.webevents.yahoo.com/mailbeta/newmail_tools.html