On Tue, 1 Jun 2004, Paul Nash wrote:
> Thanks for your response. I think I understand what's happening a little
> bit more now, after much gymnastics and an ill-fated attempt to build some
> of the project myself. Actually, I was able to make everything by pulling
> down a source tarball, but since I didn't have db4-devel installed, I got a
> client only build. Fine for my purposes, but then when I tried a "make
> install" (as root or with a DESTDIR) a bunch of the libsvn relinks failed
> for some reason. So I gave up on that route for now.
> It appears that the 1.0.2 packages are fine, but the neon 0.24.6-1 package
> in the 1.0.3 subdir has the depends problem. It Requires: GLIBC2_3. I was
> hoping to install the latest and greatest available, that being 1.0.3 (there
> aren't any 1.0.4 packages up yet...) but I guess for now I'll go with a
> slightly older client. Of course I'm not terribly happy about this, given
> the security bug, but it works for my immediate needs. Since I have gotten
> far enough to build libneon, perhaps I'll try upgrading just that part.
$ rpm -q neon
$ rpm -q --requires neon
zlib >= 1.1.4
rpmlib(PayloadFilesHavePrefix) <= 4.0-1
rpmlib(CompressedFileNames) <= 3.0.4-1
Let me know if I can help out with anything (as I have time, of course).
If someone has a RedHat 7.2 system that I could log on to then I might be
able to build my RPMs on that system. Root access should not be needed.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Summers [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> Sent: Sunday, May 30, 2004 10:37 AM
> To: Paul Nash
> Subject: Re: svn RH7x packages vs. RH7.2
> On Fri, 28 May 2004, Paul Nash wrote:
> > I was wondering if you could tell me what your recommendation is to use
> > subversion RH7x binary rpms with RH7.2. The problem I have with them is
> > that they are apparently built against glibc-2.3, amongst other things,
> > that isn't available through the updates RH has released to 7.2 or even
> > I got it to work on one machine I had, eventually, by upgrading about half
> > the packages (used RH8.0 packages, after upgrading rpm itself to 4.0.4,
> > other stuff, plus...YUK).
> I'd be glad to help out if I can. As far as I know I just have a RH 7.3
> generic install with no updates to build the 7.X RPMs. Before I switched
> my server from 7.2 to 7.3 a year or so ago the RPMs were working fine for
> me on 7.2. I just checked and my RH 7.3 system has glibc-2.2.5-43 on it.
> I can send you a "rpm -qa" of my RH7.3 system if you are interested.
> If it is not working on 7.2 then I suggest you take my source RPMs and
> re-compile them on 7.2.
> You might first start with neon and make sure you can compile that. It is
> pretty easy to compile. Then do apache with APR and APR-UTILS. You can
> take that from my (S)RPMs and should be able to compile that. Once that
> is done then go for Subversion. Subversion has some other pre-requisites
> because I do the documentation, python, etc.
> Keep me posted and I'll try to step you though stuff.
> > Anyway, my problem is that all our development workstations
> have a
> > standardized package set, and we test our software running standard builds
> > against the same glibc everywhere, because it's similar to the version of
> > glibc shipping on our embedded device. So I don't really want to upgrade
> > everybody's clients.
> > Could you maybe help me figure out a set of steps so that I can rebuild
> > these packages locally to be linked against older RH7.2 libraries so
> > everyone else can install them with no speed bumps? Thx...
> > -Paul
David Wayne Summers "Linux: Because reboots are for hardware upgrades!"
david_at_summersoft.fay.ar.us PGP Key: http://summersoft.fay.ar.us/~david/pgp.txt
PGP Key fingerprint = C0 E0 4F 50 DD A9 B6 2B 60 A1 31 7E D2 28 6D A8
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Wed Jun 2 04:55:47 2004