On May 22, 2011, at 3:44 AM, Ed W wrote: > Hi > >>> Grateful if you would consider accepting this functionality into the >>> next shorewall release (for me a large performance increase, and >>> eliminated of a dependency) >> >> Hi Ed, >> >> This patch *should* be unnecessary. If you don't want Shorewall to use >> 'make' then: > > Let me rephrase my problem description: > > I *want* the AUTO_MAKE=Yes type functionality, ie that the rules are > only compiled if they have changed, but I don't want to have to install > "make" on the target box to achieve this functionality > > Does that make sense?
Yes -- attached is a similar patch that avoids all of the manipulation of RESTOREFILE. -Tom
NOMAKE.patch
Description: Binary data
Tom Eastep \ When I die, I want to go like my Grandfather who Shoreline, \ died peacefully in his sleep. Not screaming like Washington, USA \ all of the passengers in his car http://shorewall.net \________________________________________________
PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ What Every C/C++ and Fortran developer Should Know! Read this article and learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help Windows* and Linux* C/C++ and Fortran developers boost performance applications - including clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay
_______________________________________________ Shorewall-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/shorewall-users
