[with patch, needs review] Improve the building of eclib (shared/static objects)

Please remember to put the "[with patch, needs review]" at the *beginning* of the summary.

I do not like the "-fPIC" -> "-fpic" change, otherwise I am fine with the patch.

Cheers,

Michael

Hi Michael,

I didn't think you would take it anyway as it has GNU-ism like: (SO_LIBNAME): FPICFLAG= $(PICFLAG)

export FPICFLAG

I thought a bit more about -fPIC versus -fPIC and I guess in the interest of KISS we should probably stick to -fPIC as ppc and may be other may balk otherwise.

OK new patches to ungnu-ify the makefiles and build shared and static objects properly and use the bin folder. Tested with bsd make and gnu make - didn't have time for sun make, should work though. spkg-install also updated. everything is against eclib-20080310.p4

updated the patches to 20080310.p5.

I'm probably not the best person to review this but if there's anything I can do, please let me know. John

I think there are some issues with eclib-ungnu.patch:

• the formal changes, i.e. the removal of the ".o" from the makefiles should be independent of the other changes for reviewing purposes
• some of the fixes will have the makefiles as is working with Sage, but if anyone attempted to compile eclib without explicitly setting env variables like NTL the compile will break or the build will not include features like pari support. I don't care which way we go here, but this is up to John since it is his code project.

As is the patch needs to be rebased slighly:

/eclib-20080310.p7/src$ patch -p1 --dry-run < eclib-ungnu.patch\?format\=raw 
patching file Makefile
Hunk #4 FAILED at 45.
1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej
patching file Makefile.dynamic
patching file g0n/Makefile
Hunk #2 succeeded at 25 with fuzz 2.
patching file procs/Makefile
Hunk #2 FAILED at 23.
1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file procs/Makefile.rej
patching file qcurves/Makefile
patching file qrank/Makefile

I am -1 on all the other three patches at this ticket. Some of those might be salvaged, i.e. from the spkg-install patches like the better installation, but the PIC->pic change is just plain wrong.

Cheers,

Michael

Replying to mabshoff:

I think there are some issues with eclib-ungnu.patch: * the formal changes, i.e. the removal of the ".o" from the makefiles should be independent of the other changes for reviewing purposes * some of the fixes will have the makefiles as is working with Sage, but if anyone attempted to compile eclib without explicitly setting env variables like NTL the compile will break or the build will not include features like pari support. I don't care which way we go here, but this is up to John since it is his code project. As is the patch needs to be rebased slighly: {{{ /eclib-20080310.p7/src$ patch -p1 --dry-run < eclib-ungnu.patch\?format\=raw patching file Makefile Hunk #4 FAILED at 45. 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej patching file Makefile.dynamic patching file g0n/Makefile Hunk #2 succeeded at 25 with fuzz 2. patching file procs/Makefile Hunk #2 FAILED at 23. 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file procs/Makefile.rej patching file qcurves/Makefile patching file qrank/Makefile }}} I am -1 on all the other three patches at this ticket. Some of those might be salvaged, i.e. from the spkg-install patches like the better installation, but the PIC->pic change is just plain wrong. Cheers, Michael

I am happy to go along with whatever is best for Sage. I agree that one should be able to type "make" without setting environment variables manually. John

Hi guys,

I am a bit out of action at the moment but I should comment on what I had done and why.

Replying to mabshoff:

I think there are some issues with eclib-ungnu.patch: * the formal changes, i.e. the removal of the ".o" from the makefiles should be independent of the other changes for reviewing purposes

I reviewed my patch and the removal of the ".o" and its inclusion in $(OBJ_SUF) and $(SOBJ_SUF) was needed to write a working ".SUFFIXES:" old unix style rule and keep putting "_n" in the object. It can be simplified if we remove it. It is a remnant of the various building options that weren't used in sage but could be restored with a bit of creativity and some environment variables.

* some of the fixes will have the makefiles as is working with Sage, but if anyone attempted to compile eclib without explicitly setting env variables like NTL the compile will break or the build will not include features like pari support. I don't care which way we go here, but this is up to John since it is his code project.

The behavior before and after the patch is currently the same if you don't set any variables. It defaults to look for stuff in /usr/local . Either you do some autodetection or you pass variables. It probably should be documented in a README.

As is the patch needs to be rebased slighly: {{{ /eclib-20080310.p7/src$ patch -p1 --dry-run < eclib-ungnu.patch\?format\=raw patching file Makefile Hunk #4 FAILED at 45. 1 out of 4 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file Makefile.rej patching file Makefile.dynamic patching file g0n/Makefile Hunk #2 succeeded at 25 with fuzz 2. patching file procs/Makefile Hunk #2 FAILED at 23. 1 out of 6 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file procs/Makefile.rej patching file qcurves/Makefile patching file qrank/Makefile }}}

I'll have a look and rebase it if that's all it takes.

I am -1 on all the other three patches at this ticket. Some of those might be salvaged, i.e. from the spkg-install patches like the better installation, but the PIC->pic change is just plain wrong.

The two first patches are really obsolete in many ways. And yes, after doing some growing up I realise PIC->pic is wrong for something like sage. It is debatable that it could be selected appropriately at the start of the building process but that wouldn't be KISS.

Cheers, Michael

Cheers, Francois

new patch for spkg.install + new patch file for environment variables

OK it took me a little bit more time than expected - because of life and going back to this uncovered several "itches". So in summary there are two patches. eclib-ungnu.patch: *rebased on 20080310.p7 *do away with multiple building options we only build with ntl - that simplifies the suffixes of object files. *created an install target *Got enough of sub-makefile including the top makefile just for environment variables, creating a lot of noise about over-riding target and so on - splitting was the only option that I knew would result in something compatible with BSD make (and incidentally sun make: bonus!).

spkg.patch: *rebased on 20080310.p7 *updated spkg-install to reflect changes in makefiles and the setting of environment variables. *included a Makefile.env in the patch directory to put the environment variables correctly for sage.

cheers, Francois

Thanks Francois,

I have deleted the old and no longer useful patches so that only the two current patches remain. I will review those patches in the near future to avoid bitrot again.

Cheers,

Michael