[PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Thomas Koeller]

Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
is wrong.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org>
---
 extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile |    5 +++--
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile b/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
index 96ee8f5..95bb2ed 100644
--- a/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
+++ b/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
@@ -5,8 +5,9 @@
 # Released under the GNU General Public License, version 2.
 #
 includedir = 	${prefix}/usr/include
-libdir =	${prefix}/lib
-usrlibdir =	${prefix}/usr/lib
+oslibdir =	$(shell $(CC) $(CFLAGS) -print-multi-os-directory)
+libdir =	$(realpath ${prefix}/lib/$(oslibdir))
+usrlibdir =	$(realpath ${prefix}/usr/lib/$(oslibdir))
 
 INSTALL = install -c
 INSTALL_DATA  = ${INSTALL} -m 644
-- 
1.5.6.1

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Harald Hoyer]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 203 bytes --]

Thomas Koeller wrote:
> Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
> is wrong.
> 

Fedora has the attached patch and builds on 64bit systems with:
$ make libdir="/lib64" usrlibdir="/usr/lib64" ...

[-- Attachment #1.2: udev-091-lib64.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2346 bytes --]

diff -up udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile.lib64 udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
--- udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile.lib64	2008-04-04 14:13:33.000000000 +0200
+++ udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile	2008-04-04 14:15:05.000000000 +0200
@@ -4,9 +4,9 @@
 #
 # Released under the GNU General Public License, version 2.
 #
-includedir = 	${prefix}/usr/include
-libdir =	${prefix}/lib
-usrlibdir =	${prefix}/usr/lib
+includedir ?= 	${prefix}/usr/include
+libdir ?=	${prefix}/lib
+usrlibdir ?=	${prefix}/usr/lib
 
 INSTALL = install -c
 INSTALL_DATA  = ${INSTALL} -m 644
@@ -115,6 +115,7 @@ ifeq ($(libdir),$(usrlibdir))
 else
 	ln -sf $(libdir)/$(SHLIB) $(DESTDIR)$(usrlibdir)/libvolume_id.so
 endif
+	$(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a $(DESTDIR)$(usrlibdir)/libvolume_id.a
 	$(INSTALL) -d $(DESTDIR)$(usrlibdir)/pkgconfig
 	$(INSTALL_DATA) libvolume_id.pc $(DESTDIR)$(usrlibdir)/pkgconfig/libvolume_id.pc
 .PHONY: install
diff -up udev-120/extras/volume_id/Makefile.lib64 udev-120/extras/volume_id/Makefile
--- udev-120/extras/volume_id/Makefile.lib64	2008-04-03 21:12:53.000000000 +0200
+++ udev-120/extras/volume_id/Makefile	2008-04-04 14:13:33.000000000 +0200
@@ -17,6 +17,9 @@ usrsbindir =	${prefix}/usr/sbin
 libudevdir =	${prefix}/lib/udev
 mandir =	${prefix}/usr/share/man
 configdir =	${etcdir}/udev/
+libdir ?=       ${prefix}/lib
+usrlibdir ?=    ${prefix}/usr/lib
+
 
 INSTALL = install -c
 INSTALL_PROGRAM = ${INSTALL}
@@ -34,7 +37,11 @@ all: lib $(PROG) $(MAN_PAGES)
 	$(Q) $(CC) -c $(CFLAGS) $< -o $@
 
 lib:
-	$(Q) $(MAKE) -C $@
+	$(Q) $(MAKE) \
+		libdir=$(libdir) \
+		usrlibdir=$(usrlibdir) \
+		-C lib
+#	$(Q) $(MAKE) -C $@
 .PHONY: lib
 
 lib/libvolume_id.a: lib
diff -up udev-120/Makefile.lib64 udev-120/Makefile
--- udev-120/Makefile.lib64	2008-04-03 21:12:53.000000000 +0200
+++ udev-120/Makefile	2008-04-04 14:13:33.000000000 +0200
@@ -91,6 +91,8 @@ usrbindir =	${prefix}/usr/bin
 libudevdir =	${prefix}/lib/udev
 mandir =	${prefix}/usr/share/man
 configdir =	${etcdir}/udev
+libdir ?= 	${prefix}/lib
+usrlibdir ?= 	${prefix}/usr/lib
 udevdir =	/dev
 DESTDIR =
 
@@ -161,6 +163,8 @@ all: $(PROGRAMS) $(MAN_PAGES)
 			RANLIB="$(RANLIB)" \
 			LIB_OBJS="$(LIB_OBJS)" \
 			LIBUDEV="$(PWD)/$(LIBUDEV)" \
+			libdir=$(libdir) \
+			usrlibdir=$(usrlibdir) \
 			-C $$target $@ || exit 1; \
 	done;
 .PHONY: all

[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature, Size: 3636 bytes --]

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Thomas Koeller]

I see. However, with the proposed patch you can simply run
'make' without overloading any variables manually. The
patch is also simpler.

tk

On Dienstag, 8. Juli 2008, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Thomas Koeller wrote:
> > Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
> > is wrong.
>
> Fedora has the attached patch and builds on 64bit systems with:
> $ make libdir="/lib64" usrlibdir="/usr/lib64" ...



-- 
Thomas Koeller
thomas at koeller dot dyndns dot org

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Kay Sievers]

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 08:53, Harald Hoyer <harald@redhat.com> wrote:
> Thomas Koeller wrote:
>>
>> Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
>> is wrong.
>>
>
> Fedora has the attached patch and builds on 64bit systems with:
> $ make libdir="/lib64" usrlibdir="/usr/lib64" ...

This is not needed, it works fine without the patch. We all do it that
way for long.

> diff -up udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile.lib64
> udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
> +       $(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a

What would be the point to package an intermediate internal udev build
file?. This is not a library, and nothing that should be distributed
with a package.

Thanks,
Kay

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Thomas Koeller]

When building with 'USE_STATIC = false' in the top level Makefile, which is
the default, a shared library is generated which of course needs to be
installed.

Thomas

On Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2008, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 08:53, Harald Hoyer <harald@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Thomas Koeller wrote:
> >> Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
> >> is wrong.
> >
> > Fedora has the attached patch and builds on 64bit systems with:
> > $ make libdir="/lib64" usrlibdir="/usr/lib64" ...
>
> This is not needed, it works fine without the patch. We all do it that
> way for long.
>
> > diff -up udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile.lib64
> > udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
> > +       $(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a
>
> What would be the point to package an intermediate internal udev build
> file?. This is not a library, and nothing that should be distributed
> with a package.
>
> Thanks,
> Kay
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hotplug" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html



-- 
Thomas Koeller
thomas@koeller.dyndns.org

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Kay Sievers]

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 23:35, Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org> wrote:
> When building with 'USE_STATIC = false' in the top level Makefile, which is
> the default, a shared library is generated which of course needs to be
> installed.

It's a .a, which is a static lib, not a shared one which is obviously
installed by default. But still, why would someone need that "lib",
which is usually only build to create a static vol_id?

Kay

> On Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2008, Kay Sievers wrote:
>> On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 08:53, Harald Hoyer <harald@redhat.com> wrote:
>> > Thomas Koeller wrote:
>> >> Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
>> >> is wrong.
>> >
>> > Fedora has the attached patch and builds on 64bit systems with:
>> > $ make libdir="/lib64" usrlibdir="/usr/lib64" ...
>>
>> This is not needed, it works fine without the patch. We all do it that
>> way for long.
>>
>> > diff -up udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile.lib64
>> > udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
>> > +       $(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a
>>
>> What would be the point to package an intermediate internal udev build
>> file?. This is not a library, and nothing that should be distributed
>> with a package.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Kay

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Dan Nicholson]

On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 2:44 PM, Kay Sievers <kay.sievers@vrfy.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 23:35, Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org> wrote:
>> When building with 'USE_STATIC = false' in the top level Makefile, which is
>> the default, a shared library is generated which of course needs to be
>> installed.
>
> It's a .a, which is a static lib, not a shared one which is obviously
> installed by default. But still, why would someone need that "lib",
> which is usually only build to create a static vol_id?

Just for arguments sake, you could statically link libvolume_id.a into
HAL or util-linux or anyone else that wants to use libvolume_id.
However, I'd say that if someone has a special need like that then
they can certainly copy libvolume_id.a manually to $libdir.

--
Dan

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Thomas Koeller]

On Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2008, Kay Sievers wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 23:35, Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org> 
wrote:
> > When building with 'USE_STATIC = false' in the top level Makefile, which
> > is the default, a shared library is generated which of course needs to be
> > installed.
>
> It's a .a, which is a static lib, not a shared one which is obviously
> installed by default. But still, why would someone need that "lib",
> which is usually only build to create a static vol_id?

This is from extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile:

SHLIB = libvolume_id.so.$(SHLIB_CUR).$(SHLIB_REV).$(SHLIB_AGE)
...
all: libvolume_id.a $(SHLIB) libvolume_id.pc


As you can see, a shared libvolume_id.so is built, and this is what
actually happens when invoking make with the Makefile unmodified. Try
it if you don't believe me.

Thomas


-- 
Thomas Koeller
thomas@koeller.dyndns.org

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Kay Sievers]

On Thu, 2008-07-10 at 00:41 +0200, Thomas Koeller wrote:
> On Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2008, Kay Sievers wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 23:35, Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org> 
> wrote:
> > > When building with 'USE_STATIC = false' in the top level Makefile, which
> > > is the default, a shared library is generated which of course needs to be
> > > installed.
> >
> > It's a .a, which is a static lib, not a shared one which is obviously
> > installed by default. But still, why would someone need that "lib",
> > which is usually only build to create a static vol_id?
> 
> This is from extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile:
> 
> SHLIB = libvolume_id.so.$(SHLIB_CUR).$(SHLIB_REV).$(SHLIB_AGE)
> ...
> all: libvolume_id.a $(SHLIB) libvolume_id.pc
> 
> 
> As you can see, a shared libvolume_id.so is built, and this is what
> actually happens when invoking make with the Makefile unmodified. Try
> it if you don't believe me.

Sure, I obviously know what that Makefile does. :)

But in the patch, it's about the .a file, not the .so:
  > udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
  > +       $(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a

Kay

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Thomas Koeller]

On Donnerstag, 10. Juli 2008, Kay Sievers wrote:
> Sure, I obviously know what that Makefile does. :)
>
> But in the patch, it's about the .a file, not the .so:
>   > udev-120/extras/volume_id/lib/Makefile
>   > +       $(INSTALL_LIB) -D libvolume_id.a

What I really meant to say was:
Doesn't the fact that libvolume_id is normally (also) built
as a shared library contradict your claim that it is a
purely internal library that is not supposed to be installed?

Thomas

-- 
Thomas Koeller
thomas@koeller.dyndns.org

Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fixed installation path for 64-bit libvolume_id.so

[Kay Sievers]

On Tue, Jul 8, 2008 at 00:12, Thomas Koeller <thomas@koeller.dyndns.org> wrote:
> Installing 64-bit libraries in /lib and /usr/lib
> is wrong.

Applied.

Thanks,
Kay