From: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
To: buildroot@busybox.net
Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH v3] autofs: allow to use libtirpc instead of internal C implementation
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2017 21:03:46 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170408190346.GS5361@waldemar-brodkorb.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170408160552.131d42a4@free-electrons.com>
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Petazzoni wrote,
> Hello,
>
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2017 08:10:58 +0100, Waldemar Brodkorb wrote:
> > uClibc-ng plans to remove internal RPC implementation as it
> > is ipv4 only and can not be used for most important RPC software
> > rpcbind and nfs-utils.
> > musl does not implement RPC and GNU C library deprecated the
> > internal implementation a while ago.
> > It is still possible to use the C library implementation.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
>
> This is almost good, but there are still a few issues. I had fixed most
> of them locally, but one needs a bit more work.
>
> > diff --git a/package/autofs/0004-libtirpc-via-pkgconfig.patch b/package/autofs/0004-libtirpc-via-pkgconfig.patch
> > new file mode 100644
> > index 0000000..784b4c6
> > --- /dev/null
> > +++ b/package/autofs/0004-libtirpc-via-pkgconfig.patch
> > @@ -0,0 +1,83 @@
> > +Use pkg-config to find libtirpc headers
> > +
> > +Signed-off-by: Waldemar Brodkorb <wbx@openadk.org>
>
> Please format your patch with Git. The Git repo is available at
> https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/storage/autofs/autofs.git/, create
> a branch based on the release_5_1_2 tag, and import the three existing
> patches.
Okay, I understand this.
> > ++AC_PATH_PROGS(PKG_CONFIG, pkg-config, no)
> > ++
> > + # save current flags
> > + af_check_libtirpc_save_cflags="$CFLAGS"
> > + af_check_libtirpc_save_ldflags="$LDFLAGS"
> > +-CFLAGS="$CFLAGS -I/usr/include/tirpc"
> > +-LDFLAGS="$LDFLAGS -ltirpc"
> > ++
> > ++TIRPC_LIBS=`$PKG_CONFIG --libs libtirpc`
> > ++TIRPC_FLAGS=`$PKG_CONFIG --cflags libtirpc`
>
> Please PKG_CHECK_MODULES() instead.
I tried, but failed. Do you have some examples how
PKG_CHECK_MODULES() should be used? I am not a autotool expert, so I
am unsure how to create a patch which will be accepted by upstream.
best regards
Waldemar
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-04-08 19:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-23 7:10 [Buildroot] [PATCH v3] autofs: allow to use libtirpc instead of internal C implementation Waldemar Brodkorb
2017-04-02 3:40 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
2017-04-08 14:05 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2017-04-08 19:03 ` Waldemar Brodkorb [this message]
2017-04-08 19:38 ` Thomas Petazzoni
2017-04-10 5:33 ` Waldemar Brodkorb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20170408190346.GS5361@waldemar-brodkorb.de \
--to=wbx@openadk.org \
--cc=buildroot@busybox.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox