firefly at one2one-networks
Jul 31, 2001, 6:31 AM
Harald Welte wrote:
Re: [PATCH] make make install DESTDIR=xxx work
[In reply to]
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2001 at 12:19:57AM +0200, Peter Firefly Lund wrote:
> > Since iptables and ip6tables load extensions from shared libraries at
> > run-time, the destination patch for the shared library files must be
> > compiled into the programs.
> That is exactly how it is _not_ supposed to work.
Thanks for telling me :) (it wasn't really obvious)
> the DESTDIR stuff is mainly intended for automatic packaging systems
> (like RPM) who do out-of-system installs (i.e. into a RPM BuildRoot).
I see... don't have any experience building RPMs and unfortunately still only a
little building Debian packages :/
> This way you install the files somewhere else in your system, just because
> it is easier to package them up from there, and you don't need to be root
> to build the package, ...
> After you then install the just-built package (RPM, whatever) the files are
> on their real locations within the system. And we certainly don't want to
> have the DESTDIR compiled into the binaries, exactly for that reason.
> Nothing iptables specific, it's the same with almost all packages.
Now, what is then the right way then to install more than one version of
Should we pass some other environment variable as a -D define into the
compilation of the iptable binaries so they can find the right ipt_*.so files
for handling extensions?
It just seemed natural to me that since make install uses DESTDIR to figure out
where to place the ipt_*.so files, the binaries should be compiled to match
I still have the need, occasionally, to play around with several versions of
some programs, including, I think, iptables.
If I send you a patch that uses one more environment variables so both
scenarios are supported and that defaults to the current way of working, will
you accept that?
> > +.PHONY: default
> The phony fixes are valid, I'm including them in the Makefile just now.
> > -Peter
> > Probably the last time I use Netscape to submit patches :(
> maybe a good idea not to use proprietary mail clients anyway :)
I'll switch to Evolution Real Soon Now. v0.10 wasn't really good enough, v0.11
should be a lot better but I haven't tried it yet (Not Enough Time :/ ).
Anyway, I send patches from firefly [at] diku with Pine from now on.
PS: Btw. got a lot further with our debug today. Seems that it wasn't even a
netfilter problem but a switch or router problem... arggh. :(