[patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[Mike Frysinger]

if NO_SHARED_LIBS is defined, then iptables shouldnt even include dlfcn.h.
otherwise you hit a build failure when using toolchains that do not provide
dlfcn.h because they do not support shared objects.

Signed-Off-By: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
---
i'd file a bug on the netfilter bugzilla, but looks like the system is hosed ...

Index: iptables-save.c
===================================================================
--- iptables-save.c	(revision 7145)
+++ iptables-save.c	(working copy)
@@ -11,12 +11,15 @@
 #include <fcntl.h>
 #include <stdlib.h>
 #include <string.h>
-#include <dlfcn.h>
 #include <time.h>
 #include <netdb.h>
 #include "libiptc/libiptc.h"
 #include "iptables.h"
 
+#ifndef NO_SHARED_LIBS
+#include <dlfcn.h>
+#endif
+
 static int binary = 0, counters = 0;
 
 static struct option options[] = {
Index: xtables.c
===================================================================
--- xtables.c	(revision 7145)
+++ xtables.c	(working copy)
@@ -16,7 +16,6 @@
  *	Foundation, Inc., 675 Mass Ave, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA.
  */
 
-#include <dlfcn.h>
 #include <errno.h>
 #include <fcntl.h>
 #include <netdb.h>
@@ -31,6 +30,10 @@
 
 #include <xtables.h>
 
+#ifndef NO_SHARED_LIBS
+#include <dlfcn.h>
+#endif
+
 #define NPROTO	255
 
 #ifndef PROC_SYS_MODPROBE
Index: ip6tables-save.c
===================================================================
--- ip6tables-save.c	(revision 7145)
+++ ip6tables-save.c	(working copy)
@@ -11,13 +11,16 @@
 #include <fcntl.h>
 #include <stdlib.h>
 #include <string.h>
-#include <dlfcn.h>
 #include <time.h>
 #include <netdb.h>
 #include <arpa/inet.h>
 #include "libiptc/libip6tc.h"
 #include "ip6tables.h"
 
+#ifndef NO_SHARED_LIBS
+#include <dlfcn.h>
+#endif
+
 static int binary = 0, counters = 0;
 
 static struct option options[] = {

Re: [patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Dec 19 2007 07:15, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>
>if NO_SHARED_LIBS is defined, then iptables shouldnt even include
>dlfcn.h. otherwise you hit a build failure when using toolchains
>that do not provide dlfcn.h because they do not support shared
>objects.

Ideally such things would be done by autotools. Patch still floating :)

Re: [patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 520 bytes --]

On Wednesday 19 December 2007, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Dec 19 2007 07:15, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >if NO_SHARED_LIBS is defined, then iptables shouldnt even include
> >dlfcn.h. otherwise you hit a build failure when using toolchains
> >that do not provide dlfcn.h because they do not support shared
> >objects.
>
> Ideally such things would be done by autotools. Patch still floating :)

i agree 100%, but i work with what i've got, and what i've got is svn trunk 
which is still just a Makefile ;)
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[Patrick McHardy]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> if NO_SHARED_LIBS is defined, then iptables shouldnt even include dlfcn.h.
> otherwise you hit a build failure when using toolchains that do not provide
> dlfcn.h because they do not support shared objects.

Applied, thanks. With some luck Pablo hasn't started preparing the 1.4.0
release yet :)

Re: [patch] iptables and NO_SHARED_LIBS/dlfcn.h

[Pablo Neira Ayuso]

Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> if NO_SHARED_LIBS is defined, then iptables shouldnt even include 
>> dlfcn.h.
>> otherwise you hit a build failure when using toolchains that do not 
>> provide
>> dlfcn.h because they do not support shared objects.
> 
> Applied, thanks. With some luck Pablo hasn't started preparing the 1.4.0
> release yet :)

I didn't yet, I'll probably do tomorrow or friday. I forgot that this 
week is plenty of checkpoint exams :(