|
Message-ID: <000001cb6776$97e573f0$c7b05bd0$@net> Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 01:55:36 -0400 From: "Robert Harris" <rs904c@...scape.net> To: <john-users@...ts.openwall.com> Subject: RE: Patch for Makefile, concerning Solaris x86 Alex and John-Users, We does the tgtsnarf program do, anyway? Why is it only built in Solaris? So that there is one good Makefile for Solaris and all other builds... I purpose we either do this for each Solaris build item (What is a better name for this?), Option 1) (add the text "-lnsl -lsocket" to each Solaris build item's LDFLAGS) solaris-x86-sse2-gcc: $(LN) x86-sse.h arch.h $(MAKE) $(PROJ) \ JOHN_OBJS="$(JOHN_OBJS) c3_fmt.o solaris-x86.o x86-sse.o sha1-mmx.o md5-mmx.o" \ CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS) -DHAVE_CRYPT" \ LDFLAGS="$(LDFLAGS) -lrt -lnsl -lsocket" or this for each Solaris item Option 2) (create a new global variable for Solaris only, and use that in the LDFLAGS) (Looks like you have a MARKOV LDFLAGS, why not a new one for Solaris?) LDFLAGS_SOLARIS = -lnsl -lsocket (New Global variable) solaris-x86-sse2-gcc: $(LN) x86-sse.h arch.h $(MAKE) $(PROJ) \ JOHN_OBJS="$(JOHN_OBJS) c3_fmt.o solaris-x86.o x86-sse.o sha1-mmx.o md5-mmx.o" \ CFLAGS="$(CFLAGS) -DHAVE_CRYPT" \ LDFLAGS="$(LDFLAGS_SOLARIS) -lrt" Which do you prefer? Looks like either one works. -Robert Harris -----Original Message----- From: Solar Designer [mailto:solar@...nwall.com] Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 5:56 PM To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [john-users] Patch for Makefile, concerning Solaris x86 Robert, On Fri, Oct 08, 2010 at 05:42:58PM -0400, Robert Harris wrote: > I was thinking about doing it in the global LDFLAGS, but that would affect > all builds. Wouldn't that cause a problem? (I haven't checked yet, if it > would). Of course, it would break builds on most non-Solaris systems. I'm sorry, I've used poor wording below. By "global" LDFLAGS, I meant non-program-specific ones - that is, overrides for the LDFLAGS value that you specify in solaris-* targets, as opposed to overrides of some new make variable that would be specific to the tgtsnarf program (such a variable doesn't exist currently). I argued that using the existing non-program-specific LDFLAGS was sort of OK this time because the jumbo patch was already doing it for other libraries that would otherwise need to be program-specific. If we're to improve upon this, we'd need to do it for more than just tgtsnarf anyway. > From: Solar Designer [mailto:solar@...nwall.com] ... > All solaris-* targets need it (this means solaris-sparc* and *-cc ones > as well), albeit only for the tgtsnarf program in the jumbo patch. It > is easier to add the options to the global LDFLAGS rather than to try > to do it for tgtsnarf only. In fact, the jumbo patch is already dirty > in this aspect anyway - it similarly unnecessarily links some programs > against OpenSSL. So we can continue this "tradition" for now... Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.