Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!

Bug 185050

Summary: sys-auth/pam_chroot makefile cleanup
Product: Gentoo Linux Reporter: Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) <flameeyes>
Component: New packagesAssignee: Ali Polatel (RETIRED) <hawking>
Status: RESOLVED FIXED    
Severity: normal CC: pam-bugs+disabled
Priority: High    
Version: unspecified   
Hardware: All   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---
Attachments: Ebuild patch
pam_chroot-0.9.1-makefile.patch

Description Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-07-12 09:35:36 UTC
Hi Ali :)

As I'm gonna need pam_chroot to get some extra keyword and probably some stable marking before marking pam 0.99 stable, I've checked pam_chroot for minor QA issues.

The attached patch makes it respect LDFLAGS (and link with --as-needed) and respects LD too.
I sincerely wonder if it would be simpler to build it manually in the ebuild, but anyway this works :)

Thanks for the help!
Diego
Comment 1 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-07-12 09:35:57 UTC
Created attachment 124620 [details, diff]
Ebuild patch
Comment 2 Diego Elio Pettenò (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-07-12 09:36:20 UTC
Created attachment 124622 [details, diff]
pam_chroot-0.9.1-makefile.patch
Comment 3 Ali Polatel (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2007-07-12 20:39:11 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> Hi Ali :)
> 
> As I'm gonna need pam_chroot to get some extra keyword and probably some stable
> marking before marking pam 0.99 stable, I've checked pam_chroot for minor QA
> issues.
> 

hrm this sounds serious :p

> The attached patch makes it respect LDFLAGS (and link with --as-needed) and
> respects LD too.

I've modified the patch a bit and committed it. Here is what I've done:
- Added back -W* flags to CFLAGS. If upstream put them there they are there for a reason and it's of crucial importance to detect if a pam module has problems at compile time imo.
- Moved -x and --shared and removed LDFLAGS declaration so we won't need to
export LDFLAGS and just pass it to emake which looks more appropriate.

> I sincerely wonder if it would be simpler to build it manually in the ebuild,
> but anyway this works :)

Hehe, right :) I'll send your patch upstream, hopefully we'll get a nicer
Makefile with the next version.

> Thanks for the help!
> Diego
> 

Sure, feel free to poke me at IRC or reopen this one if I did anything wrong.

Ali