Subject: Re: Logo,RPMs,Version
From: andrew morgan (morgan@orst.edu)
Date: Tue Aug 01 2000 - 22:02:39 EDT
On Tue, 1 Aug 2000, Steve Freitas wrote:
> >About RPM/Source;
> >I just *love* RPMs.
>
> Yes. If we can create RPMs which include the features people want (e.g.
> rand*num, DHX, proper alias line for /etc/conf.modules in RH6.2, etc.),
> we'll remove an immense amount of pain for users.
I think this is a good idea, but it seems like it might be tough to
account for all the necessary crypto libraries. randnum requires DES,
which is fairly standard, but the DHX support requires openssl, which does
not come on most distributions right now (due to export restrictions, I
believe). I'm not a whiz with RPM's, so maybe there are simple ways
around this.
> >I think the testing of new releases can be made more efficient by
> >offering RPMs. Not everybody has the time to do recompiles for every
> >new version, and I think we need as many testers as we can find.
>
> I agree with this. Unless someone can show me line-by-line *for my
> distro* how to compile the thing with all the arcane Makefile mods and
> switches, it's way too much work for a non-expert like me.
I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm just unfamiliar with all the problems
people are having. I run netatalk on redhat 5.2, 6.1, and 6.2. I start
with pre-asun37b or 39_test. All I modify is the top-level Makefile. I
set my installation directory, uncomment PAMDIR, and check that CRYPTODIR
points to my openssl install. Then just make, make install.
What distributions are causing problems, and how can we fix this?
Andy
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b28 : Wed Jan 17 2001 - 14:31:47 EST