327864 - LDAP C-SDK support for Mac cross builds

Status: RESOLVED FIXED

(Directory Graveyard :: LDAP C SDK, defect)

Description

[Mark Mentovai]

This is bug 322578 for the LDAP C-SDK.  It needs to support Mac cross builds in order to enable universal binaries of Thunderbird and Seamonkey.

In order to do this properly, Mac SDK support needs to be added to the LDAP C-SDK.  It's managed to escape unscathed so far (unlike NSPR and NSS), but its time has now come.

Comment 1

[Mark Mentovai]

Attachment: Mac cross build and SDK support

This patch mostly brings the work I've done in NSPR over to LDAP.  The only suspicious-looking thing here is the removal of the AC_TRY_COMPILE/HOST_CC check, which was failing because OBJEXT wasn't set.  We don't have this check at all in NSPR or the top-level Mozilla configure script.

Comment 2

[Mark Smith [:mcs]]

I did not do any of the autoconf work for LDAP.  I think it would be better if dmose and richm could review this.  Complicating matters, Rich has recently made significant (but unrelated) configure changes on the trunk... so we need to make sure the MacOS cross-compile fixes eventually land on both the trunk and on ldapcsdk_50_client_branch.

Comment 3

[Mark Mentovai]

Comment on attachment 212502 [details] [diff] [review]
Mac cross build and SDK support

Retargeting.

Comment 4

[Mark Mentovai]

Although this patch was generated against ldapcsdk_50_client_branch, it applies cleanly to the trunk as well.

Comment 5

[Rich Megginson]

Looks good, and should not conflict with any recent changes.  However, I don't have access to a Mac to try this out.

Comment 6

[Mark Mentovai]

richm, is that r+ or would you like someone with a Mac to give this a spin first?

Comment 7

[Rich Megginson]

I would like to get someone with a Mac to confirm this, but if this is time critical, and since it doesn't affect the builds on the other platforms, it can be an r+.

Comment 8

[Mark Mentovai]

I'll hopefully have the universal machinery on the trunk today.  After that, it will be easy for someone else with a Mac to test this patch.

Comment 9

[nkinder]

Rich, I tested this on my 10.3.9 machine with an in-tree build of nss, nspr, and svrcore, and I had no problems building the SDK plus the command-line tools.

Comment 10

[Rich Megginson]

Thanks Nathan.
r+

Comment 11

[Mark Mentovai]

Comment on attachment 212502 [details] [diff] [review]
Mac cross build and SDK support

Marking r+ for richm.

dmose, would you like to have a look too?

Comment 12

[Dan Mosedale (:dmosedale, :dmose)]

I'm super caught up in Lightning stuff at the moment.  If Rich is happy with it, I don't feel that I need to look at it as well.

Comment 13

[Mark Mentovai]

Comment on attachment 212502 [details] [diff] [review]
Mac cross build and SDK support

Checked in on ldapcsdk_50_client_branch (for Mozilla trunk), along with a regenerated configure script.

Is the directory trunk a restricted partition like I think it is?  If so, one of you will need to check in.  If not, I'll do it.

There doesn't seem to be an approval1.8.1 flag here, could a directory owner/peer approve for landing on the MOZILLA_1_8_BRANCH?

Comment 14

[Rich Megginson]

Go ahead and check it into the ldap c sdk trunk.  If you have any problems, let me know.

Comment 15

[Mark Mentovai]

You may not check into partition Directory SDK
the file mozilla/directory/c-sdk/configure on branch HEAD
If you think you should be allowed to, send mail to
one of the below people:
  [e-mail]
  [e-mail]
  [e-mail]
cvs commit: Pre-commit check failed

Seeing as how all of those people are already CCed here, this message should suffice.

richm, despot says you can check this in to the LDAP trunk.

Also, separately, let me ask: on the client branch, configure was generated by autoconf 2.13, but on the trunk, it was generated by 2.59.  Why the shift?  Are you using anything new in 2.59 (and is it now incompatible with 2.13?)

Comment 16

[Rich Megginson]

I use Fedora Core 4 for devel so I use that version of autoconf.  I'm not aware of any incompatability, in fact I was able to use the trunk to build thunderbird.  See bug 325625 for more details.

Comment 17

[Mark Mentovai]

The only reason I bring it up is that other autoconf-based build systems in the Mozilla tree depend on autoconf 2.13, so seeing 2.59 piqued my curiosity.

Comment 18

[Rich Megginson]

Checked into trunk.
Checking in configure.in;
/cvsroot/mozilla/directory/c-sdk/configure.in,v  <--  configure.in
new revision: 5.48; previous revision: 5.47
done
Checking in configure;
/cvsroot/mozilla/directory/c-sdk/configure,v  <--  configure
new revision: 5.48; previous revision: 5.47
done
Checking in config/autoconf.mk.in;
/cvsroot/mozilla/directory/c-sdk/config/autoconf.mk.in,v  <--  autoconf.mk.in
new revision: 5.10; previous revision: 5.9
done

Comment 19

[Daniel Veditz [:dveditz] back 2026-04-08]

Comment on attachment 212502 [details] [diff] [review]
Mac cross build and SDK support

approved for 1.8.0 branch, a=dveditz for drivers

Comment 20

[Mark Mentovai]

Can I get LDAP owner/peer approval for 1.8.1 too?  mcs, dmose?

Comment 21

[Dan Mosedale (:dmosedale, :dmose)]

sure, a=dmose.

Comment 22

[Mark Mentovai]

On 1_8 and 1_8_0 too.  All wrapped up.

Comment 23

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

(In reply to comment #17)
> The only reason I bring it up is that other autoconf-based build systems in the
> Mozilla tree depend on autoconf 2.13, so seeing 2.59 piqued my curiosity.

You man need to ping benjamin to confirm that using autconf 2.59 is acceptable for the c-sdk.

Comment 24

[Rich Megginson]

Benjamin says that autoconf 2.59 is ok:

Rich Megginson wrote:

> https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=327864
>
> I've been using autoconf 2.59 (Fedora Core 4) for my ldap c sdk development.   > I was able to take this version to build the current thunderbird.  Should I be > using 2.13 for the ldap c sdk?

That is not necessary. Since autoconf is a develop-time tool and the resulting configure script is checked into CVS, you can use any autoconf that's commonly distributed. Most systems, including FC and cygwin, ship both autoconf-2.13 and autoconf (2.5x) in parallel.

--BDS

Comment 25

[Mark Mentovai]

I'd also add that it's especially not a concern as long as configure.in remains compatible with 2.13 (which some Mozilla developers may be expecting).  Even if it script breaks with 2.13, there's no auto-regen of this specific configure script, so there's very little risk of breakage.

Comment 26

[Mark Banner (:standard8)]

Just for the record, this patch has also been checked into the ldapcsdk_5_17_client_branch - apparently the branch was cut just before it went into the trunk.