RE: statically linked compile...

[Ted Nokonechny]

The following reference may be useful ...

        http://www.deer-run.com/~hal/sol-static.txt

On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 11:45:27 -0700 "Lumpkin, Buddy" 
<Buddy.Lumpkin@nordstrom.com> wrote:

> This probably isn't the best way to statically compile cfengine, but it 
> worked fine for me 
> 
> Solaris 2.6
> Berkeley DB.3.3
> openssh installed under /usr/local/openssh
> ...
> 
> I just edited the configure script and changed every occurence of -lxx to the 
> fully qualified path of the library that is being linked.
> 
> -ldb becomes /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.3/lib/libdb-3.3.a (substitute your 
> version of course)
> -lcrypto becomes /usr/local/openssl/lib/libcrypto.a
> .. you get the idea
> I also changed the line that links libpub.a from something like -L ../pub 
> -lpub to ../pub/libpub.a.
> 
> I left the OS stuff dynamic since that will be on any OS.
> 
> Also, just for kicks I set my LDFLAGS:
> 
> LDFLAGS="/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.3/lib/libdb-3.3.a 
> /usr/local/openssl/lib/libcrypto.a /usr/local/openssl/lib/libssl.a"
> export LDFLAGS
> 
> And CPPFLAGS:
> 
> CPPFLAGS="-I/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.3/include -I/usr/local/openssl/include"
> export CPPFLAGS
> 
> 
> Here's the output of make compiling cfagent ...
> 
> gcc  -g -O2    /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.3/lib/libdb-3.3.a 
> /usr/local/openssl/lib/libcrypto.a /usr/local/openssl/lib/libssl.a 
> -L/usr/local/lib -o cfagent  cfagent.o do.o wrapper.o report.o client.o 
> process.o ifconf.o image.o item.o item-ext.o item-file.o 2Dlist.o globals.o 
> classes.o misc.o parse.o
> edittools.o patches.o install.o link.o tidy.o filedir.o eval.o modes.o 
> chflags.o locks.o mount.o macro.o filenames.o varstring.o wildcard.o 
> cfparse.o comparray.o read.o checksums.o proto.o filters.o copy.o 
> repository.o rotate.o errors.o cflex.o net.o df.o log.o encrypt.o popen.o 
> popen_def.o
> sensible.o acl.o dce_acl.o nameinfo.o strategies.o -ll 
> /usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.3/lib/libdb-3.3.a -lpthread 
> /usr/local/openssl/lib/libcrypto.a /usr/local/openssl/lib/libssl.a -lnsl 
> -lsocket -lm  -lelf -lsec ../pub/libpub.a
> 
> 
> Comments are welcome :)
> 
> --Buddy
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Walters [mailto:scott@PacketPushers.com]
> Sent: Friday, December 28, 2001 7:31 AM
> To: help-cfengine@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: statically linked compile...
> 
> 
> 
> Andrew,
> 
>       I don't think you are alone in your predicament.  I am currently
> trying to rollout cfengine 2 to a bunch of Sun machines running 2.5.1,
> 2.6, 2.7 and 8.  I'd like to have the functionality of both DB and SSL.
> 
>       I would really prefer that the cfengine 'package' be standalone
> with no dependencies to other installed software.  This also alleviates
> ongoing maintenance issues.  I am not concerned with the inefficiency of a
> statically linked binary over a shared one.
> 
>       I am not an expert in programming or compiling, so getting things
> static is a bit of a stretch.  If you could send me your notes I will try
> things on the Solaris side.
> 
>       Another possible way to deal with this chicken/egg dilema, is to
> have a 'bare-bones' cfengine install (without DB or SSL), and then have
> cfengine install the necessary libraries, and then upgrade itself.  That
> process, though feasible, seems unecessarily complicated (and prone to
> error).  And the sunfreeware.com DB and SSL library packages do not put
> things in /usr/local/lib, which leads to LD_LIBRARY_PATH issues, etc.  The
> more parts, the more places things can break . . .
> 
>       Either way this issue should get resolved and documented because
> I'd imagine it affects everyone that attempts to use cfengine.  If your
> environment is so 'managable', that it is easy to get all the libraries
> where they need to be, then how much help would cfengine be anyway? <wink>
> 
>       Let me know if you make progress with the static build.
> 
> scott
> 
> 
> On Fri, 28 Dec 2001, Andrew Mayhew wrote:
> 
> > To be honest, I didn't need all the libraries statically linked, just things
> > like BerkeleyDB and the Openssl libraries.  In other words, things that
> > would not be installed in a plain vanilla install.  The heart of the matter,
> > though, is that those 6.2 machines need to be reinstalled and brought up to
> > spec.  If cfengine were statically linked, you could do some real low level
> > os replacements (like upgrading from 6.2 to 7.2) without worrying about
> > killing the library the process needed.
> >
> > Basically, it is one of these chicken and the egg kind of problems.  How do
> > you get cfengine on machines that are already out on the network without any
> > other management tools.  With the other part of the problem being that 1)
> > all machines in production up to this point are hand crafted, and 2) you
> > want to install as few bits a possible in order to be as sure as possible
> > that you will not break something existing.
> >
> > As for being able to bring up a 6.2 machine to do the build, the reasources
> > are not available for such things.  Time and money are against me.  Since I
> > was attempting to lay down cfengine "real quick" to replace an ad-hoc
> > process (software release from development to production), I didn't have
> > time since I was told that I would be responsible for this hand off
> > Wednesday night for a Thursday handoff.  Hardware wise- there is less than 
> > no
> > money available to purchase.
> >
> > Thanks.  If anyone has any ideas on just statically linking the BerkeleyDB
> > (libdb-3.3.so) and Openssl (libcrypto.so) libraries, that would be cool.
> > Since this is hour 23 in the office my mind has stopped functioning at a
> > high enough level to know if this is 1) feasible and 2) something I already
> > know how to do.
> >
> > Thanks and apologies for the rambling.
> > --Andy
> >
> > On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 08:24:14AM -0500, Andrews, Martin wrote:
> > > What exactly is the failure? I tried a quick relink on my redhat 7.2 box 
> > > but
> > > could not find all the static libraries I needed (-lnss_nis). Are you sure
> > > you have static versions of all the libraries cfengine uses?
> > >
> > > In general this sounds like a dangerous idea - much has changed between 
> > > 6.x
> > > and 7.x and taking code compiled from newer OSes is always likely to fail.
> > > Can't you put together a quick 6.2 box (we were just selling off a bunch 
> > > of
> > > pentium pro PCs like the ones I use for linux builds for $50 a pop...)?
> > >
> > > Martin
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Help-cfengine mailing list
> > Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> > http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> >
> 
> -- 
> Scott Walters
> -PacketPusher
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Help-cfengine mailing list
> Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Help-cfengine mailing list
> Help-cfengine@gnu.org
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-cfengine

--
Ted Nokonechny
Programmer Analyst, Computing Services
University of Regina, Regina, SK, S4S 0A2
phone: (306) 585-4627  fax: (306) 585-5060  office: LY 137.2
Ted.Nokonechny@uregina.ca