Skip Menu |

Download (untitled) / with headers
text/plain 3.9KiB
From Mon Mar 17 15:12:12 1997
Received: from MIT.EDU (PACIFIC-CARRIER-ANNEX.MIT.EDU []) by rt-11.MIT.EDU (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA03046 for <bugs@RT-11.MIT.EDU>; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:12:11 -0500
Received: from by MIT.EDU with SMTP
id AA25140; Mon, 17 Mar 97 15:12:03 EST
Received: from by with ESMTP
( 3.3) id AA239459527; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 12:12:08 -0800
Received: from by
id AA097939523; Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:12:03 -0500
Message-Id: <>
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:12:03 -0500
From: Bill Sommerfeld <>
To: krb5-bugs@MIT.EDU
Subject: makefile setup very inconvenient for cross-compiling.

Show quoted text
>Number: 398
>Category: krb5-build
>Synopsis: makefile setup very inconvenient for cross-compiling.
>Confidential: no
>Severity: serious
>Priority: medium
>Responsible: tlyu
>State: analyzed
>Class: sw-bug
>Submitter-Id: unknown
>Arrival-Date: Mon Mar 17 15:13:01 EST 1997
>Last-Modified: Fri Sep 14 10:31:03 EDT 2001
>Originator: Bill Sommerfeld
Show quoted text
>Release: 1.0
We need to cross-compile stock kerberos 5 1.0 in an cross-development
environment where the environment's includes and libraries already
include a *different* GSSAPI library from the one included in the krb5
distribution. This essentially means that we have to tack on -I
options pointing at the cross-development includes at the *end* of
CFLAGS, not at the beginning.

Unfortunately it appears that:

1) the default .c.o rule is set in each, not in
config/ or config/

2) CFLAGS is set in each

3) Several of the's define CFLAGS as


so the local includes come in last; in order to accomplish this we
will have to whack all the's, which is a bit annoying..

I sure hope I'm not missing anything blindingly obvious, but it looks
as if we're going to have to whack all the CFLAGS= lines to include a
$(CCENDOPTS), or else reorder the definitions to sort the options
including `-I's to the beginning..

Anyone see an easier way out of this mess?

- Bill
Show quoted text

From: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
To: Bill Sommerfeld <>
Cc: krb5-bugs@MIT.EDU,
Subject: Re: pending/398: makefile setup very inconvenient for cross-compiling.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 15:42:45 -0500

I suspect the real right answer is to just completely rework the way
that CFLAGS gets set.... i.e. do something sane and have something
like this in


This gives CFLAGS back to the user... which is where it belongs,
rather than the CCOPTS garbage that we're using now. This probably
requires a little more design work before we go ripping up all the again.


Responsible-Changed-From-To: gnats-admin->tlyu
Responsible-Changed-By: tlyu
Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Mar 17 15:44:13 1997


State-Changed-From-To: open-analyzed
State-Changed-By: tlyu
State-Changed-When: Mon Mar 17 15:44:27 1997

From: Bill Sommerfeld <>
To: Tom Yu <tlyu@MIT.EDU>
Cc: Subject: Re: pending/398: makefile setup very inconvenient for cross-compiling.
Date: Mon, 17 Mar 1997 16:49:26 -0500

If you're going to be at Mary's tonight we can talk about it then.

A coworker is leaning on me for a solution to this problem and I'd
rather do it right.

Your approach is almost what I'd do, except that I would do:


i.e., reserve CFLAGS for options which affect compiler behavior like
-fpic, -O, -g, etc., , and segregate -D's into DEFS, and -I's into

- Bill
Show quoted text