| Message ID | 1413910694-21496-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Headers | show |
Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 13:58:14 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > +# Building static causes ugly warnings on some plugins > +IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \ > + $(if $(BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB),,--disable-static) Quick related question: does iptables work properly for purely static builds? Best regards, Thomas
Gustavo, All, On 2014-10-21 13:58 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias spake thusly: > It leads to ugly runtime warnings, see: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/386215/ > It's also required for xtables-addons. > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Zacarias <gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> Seems sensible to me: Reviewed-by: "Yann E. MORIN" <yann.morin.1998@free.fr> Regards, Yann E. MORIN. > --- > package/iptables/iptables.mk | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/package/iptables/iptables.mk b/package/iptables/iptables.mk > index f059807..2ef879d 100644 > --- a/package/iptables/iptables.mk > +++ b/package/iptables/iptables.mk > @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@ IPTABLES_DEPENDENCIES = host-pkgconf \ > $(if $(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBNETFILTER_CONNTRACK),libnetfilter_conntrack) > IPTABLES_LICENSE = GPLv2 > IPTABLES_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING > -IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr > +# Building static causes ugly warnings on some plugins > +IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \ > + $(if $(BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB),,--disable-static) > # Because of iptables-01-fix-static-link.patch > IPTABLES_AUTORECONF = YES > > -- > 2.0.4 > > _______________________________________________ > buildroot mailing list > buildroot@busybox.net > http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/buildroot
On 10/21/2014 02:02 PM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: > Dear Gustavo Zacarias, > > On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 13:58:14 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > >> +# Building static causes ugly warnings on some plugins >> +IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \ >> + $(if $(BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB),,--disable-static) > > Quick related question: does iptables work properly for purely static > builds? I haven't tried in a while, but probably yes, since the effect of both enables was quite similar, otherwise normally extensions live in /usr/lib/xtables/* as dynamic objects (where you can add new ones, which is what xtables-addons does besides adding new kernel modules, with the scenario right now being every extension linked into the iptables /usr/sbin/xtables-multi binary). Regards.
Dear Gustavo Zacarias, On Tue, 21 Oct 2014 13:58:14 -0300, Gustavo Zacarias wrote: > It leads to ugly runtime warnings, see: > http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/386215/ > It's also required for xtables-addons. > > Signed-off-by: Gustavo Zacarias <gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> > --- > package/iptables/iptables.mk | 4 +++- > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. Thomas
diff --git a/package/iptables/iptables.mk b/package/iptables/iptables.mk index f059807..2ef879d 100644 --- a/package/iptables/iptables.mk +++ b/package/iptables/iptables.mk @@ -12,7 +12,9 @@ IPTABLES_DEPENDENCIES = host-pkgconf \ $(if $(BR2_PACKAGE_LIBNETFILTER_CONNTRACK),libnetfilter_conntrack) IPTABLES_LICENSE = GPLv2 IPTABLES_LICENSE_FILES = COPYING -IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr +# Building static causes ugly warnings on some plugins +IPTABLES_CONF_OPTS = --libexecdir=/usr/lib --with-kernel=$(STAGING_DIR)/usr \ + $(if $(BR2_PREFER_STATIC_LIB),,--disable-static) # Because of iptables-01-fix-static-link.patch IPTABLES_AUTORECONF = YES
It leads to ugly runtime warnings, see: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/386215/ It's also required for xtables-addons. Signed-off-by: Gustavo Zacarias <gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> --- package/iptables/iptables.mk | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)