how can I install manually from a tarball? - Mandriva

This is a discussion on how can I install manually from a tarball? - Mandriva ; Following Individual.net's revival of the Cancel-Lock system for usenet posts - see recent announcement in alt.usenet.news-server-comparison - I am interested in getting my slrn to create Cancel-Lock headers for itself. The Mandriva RPM for slrn is compiled without canlock support, ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: how can I install manually from a tarball?

  1. how can I install manually from a tarball?


    Following Individual.net's revival of the Cancel-Lock system for usenet
    posts - see recent announcement in alt.usenet.news-server-comparison - I
    am interested in getting my slrn to create Cancel-Lock headers for itself.

    The Mandriva RPM for slrn is compiled without canlock support, so I'm
    going to have to compile slrn from the source code - and of course, to get
    canlock to work, the canlock library has to be installed first. That's
    the part I'm stuck on.

    The only place I can find the canlock library, is
    where it can be
    downloaded as a source tarball or as Debian packages. Unfortunately, the
    tarball contains no configure script and no helpful installation
    instructions; there is a makefile and a Build script, but the best I can
    get is:

    [mark@tavy canlock2b]$ ./Build
    make: *** No rule to make target `t/sha1test.c', needed by `sha1test'. Stop.
    rm -f src/*.o t/*.o t/*.out *.gmon gmon.*
    [mark@tavy canlock2b]$

    at which point I founder. I think that I'm going to have to install
    canlock entirely by hand, but I have no idea how to go about that and
    haven't managed to find any on-line howtos that get into this sort of
    detail. So, can anyone point me in the right direction, please?

    (I have got make-3.81-1mdv2007.0 and glibc-2.4-7mdv2007.0 and
    glibc-devel-2.4-7mdv2007.0 installed).

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

  2. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    Whiskers wrote:
    > [mark@tavy canlock2b]$ ./Build
    > make: *** No rule to make target `t/sha1test.c', needed by `sha1test'. Stop.
    > rm -f src/*.o t/*.o t/*.out *.gmon gmon.*
    > [mark@tavy canlock2b]$


    This looks to me like either a makefile cannot find sha1test.c
    (needed to make sha1test.o) or an error was made in a makefile.
    See if you have a sha1test.c in the tree of source code files,
    and if so then look at the makefile (probably in the same
    directory) that should compile it to object code.

    If you do not have sha1test.c, you will either have to get
    that from another package or eliminate references to sha1test.*
    in the makefiles.

    This might be a problem with incomplete path names. When
    within canlock2b, you might try,

    CDPATH=$CDPATH:`pwd` ; export CDPATH
    and then try to build the thing.

    Cheers!

    jim b.
    --
    UNIX is not user-unfriendly; it merely
    expects users to be computer-friendly.

  3. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On 2007-06-30, Jim Beard wrote:
    > Whiskers wrote:
    >> [mark@tavy canlock2b]$ ./Build
    >> make: *** No rule to make target `t/sha1test.c', needed by `sha1test'. Stop.
    >> rm -f src/*.o t/*.o t/*.out *.gmon gmon.*
    >> [mark@tavy canlock2b]$

    >
    > This looks to me like either a makefile cannot find sha1test.c
    > (needed to make sha1test.o) or an error was made in a makefile.
    > See if you have a sha1test.c in the tree of source code files,
    > and if so then look at the makefile (probably in the same
    > directory) that should compile it to object code.
    >
    > If you do not have sha1test.c, you will either have to get
    > that from another package or eliminate references to sha1test.*
    > in the makefiles.
    >
    > This might be a problem with incomplete path names. When
    > within canlock2b, you might try,
    >
    > CDPATH=$CDPATH:`pwd` ; export CDPATH
    > and then try to build the thing.
    >
    > Cheers!
    >
    > jim b.


    Thanks for that. There is no sha1test.c file in the tarball, and no
    sha1test.o already on my system or in any of the Mandriva RPMs known to my
    urpmi.

    Some web delving lead me eventually to RFC 3174 which contains the 'code'
    for a file of that name, so I've copy/pasted that into a file of that name
    which I shall examine to correct any obvious (to my ignorant eye) copying
    errors or typos and then place in the /src/ directory of canlock2b along
    with the .c files already there, and have another go with make.

    Your clue has shed some light for me on how to read the makefile, although
    it's still not far from being gibberish to me, but I think I may be able
    to work out some more of it now. This is getting to be a bit like 'fun'.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

  4. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 14:40:16 +0000, Jim Beard wrote:

    >> [mark@tavy canlock2b]$ ./Build
    >> make: *** No rule to make target `t/sha1test.c', needed by `sha1test'.
    >> Stop. rm -f src/*.o t/*.o t/*.out *.gmon gmon.* [mark@tavy canlock2b]$


    > This looks to me like either a makefile cannot find sha1test.c (needed to
    > make sha1test.o) or an error was made in a makefile. See if you have a
    > sha1test.c in the tree of source code files, and if so then look at the
    > makefile (probably in the same directory) that should compile it to object
    > code.


    I downloaded it and tried to build it on SLack which is very friendly
    for compiling from source and got the same exact error. That would be
    with gcc 3.4.6 and make 3.81.

    I didn't bother to post anything after that as I'm a C dummy. More on
    that at the bottom.

    > If you do not have sha1test.c, you will either have to get that from
    > another package or eliminate references to sha1test.* in the makefiles.


    > This might be a problem with incomplete path names. When within canlock2b,
    > you might try,


    I looked over the makefile and saw nothing that looked like an error to
    me but that means little being the C dummy I am.

    > CDPATH=$CDPATH:`pwd` ; export CDPATH
    > and then try to build the thing.


    This I didn't try and it looks like a good idea - Setting the environment
    to something that works.

    It should be a really simple build as it's a very small package, but...

    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


  5. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:22:14 +0100, Whiskers wrote:

    > Your clue has shed some light for me on how to read the makefile,
    > although it's still not far from being gibberish


    I know the feeling.

    > to me, but I think I may be able
    > to work out some more of it now. This is getting to be a bit like
    > 'fun'.


    I have figured out how to correct a few easy makefiles but it's
    certainly not my strong suit.

    But as far as compiling from source goes, I think it's a great idea for
    some apps. Multimedia apps seem to always work better when compiled
    from source. I always build xine, mplayer, and kaffeine, from source and
    it is fun.

    Kernel compiling: I hear so many people say, "I've never needed to
    compile a kernel". Yeah there's no need but using initrd's and probing
    for all those devices is a drag on the system and slows down boot time.
    Plus the options like timing, memory model, etc, can be tailored for
    *your* machine and in almost every case will result in a faster leaner
    working Linux system.

    In fact look at man initrd and the history of initrd - It's a convenience
    for distro developers, to be able to use one "generic" kernel that will
    install on a wide variety of machines. It is not necessary to have an
    initrd. However it does have some advantages. I always keep the original
    kernel, initrd, and modules. Then I build a custom kernel and when
    that's right make it the new default.

    Keeping the old kernel and all the modules has these advantages (as
    opposed to deleting it)

    1. Of course if a new kernel fails to boot you have a fall back

    2. It makes adding new hardware easier

    3. You can simply copy or use an image of your installation and all the
    updates, customization, etc, you've done to another machine, saving hours
    of work (assuming same architecture).

    And compiling a kernel is extremely informative and a great teacher.

    ....Use the source Luke :-)
    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


  6. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On 2007-06-30, Ron Gibson wrote:
    > On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 17:22:14 +0100, Whiskers wrote:
    >
    >> Your clue has shed some light for me on how to read the makefile,
    >> although it's still not far from being gibberish

    >
    > I know the feeling.
    >
    >> to me, but I think I may be able
    >> to work out some more of it now. This is getting to be a bit like
    >> 'fun'.

    >
    > I have figured out how to correct a few easy makefiles but it's
    > certainly not my strong suit.
    >
    > But as far as compiling from source goes, I think it's a great idea for
    > some apps. Multimedia apps seem to always work better when compiled
    > from source. I always build xine, mplayer, and kaffeine, from source and
    > it is fun.


    I've only compiled when there isn't a Mandriva RPM for what I want - ie,
    seldom. 'Good enough' is mostly 'good enough'. But looking at the source
    tarball for many packages reveals optional features or settings that the
    'official' Mandriva version lacks. There are also sometimes clashes
    between RPMs that are caused by the way they've been compiled and which a
    custom compile would avoid - eg the slrn RPM insists on an inews RPM being
    installed too (although slrn usually isn't going to require inews, as far
    as I can see), whereas Noffle provides inews functionality of it's own and
    so urpmi wants to remove inews, and slrn with it, when I install Noffle -
    and then wants to remove Noffle when I try to get slrn back. Annoying. (I
    know, use the --force).

    > Kernel compiling: I hear so many people say, "I've never needed to
    > compile a kernel". Yeah there's no need but using initrd's and probing
    > for all those devices is a drag on the system and slows down boot time.
    > Plus the options like timing, memory model, etc, can be tailored for
    > *your* machine and in almost every case will result in a faster leaner
    > working Linux system.


    [...]

    I think I did compile a Mandriva kernel once, just to see if I could.

    I sometimes contemplate trying a source-based distro, such as SourceMage
    or Gentoo.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

  7. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:30:22 +0100, Whiskers wrote:

    > I sometimes contemplate trying a source-based distro, such as
    > SourceMage or Gentoo.


    Well Gentoo is sorta like going to the other extreme but the Gentoo i
    installed about 18 months ago was very good. But gawd, it takes like 20
    hours to compile KDE.

    What you mentioned about configurations, usually found by...

    ../configure --help

    Is really on point. Mplayer has a zillion options and that is exactly
    why I compile my own there.

    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


  8. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On 2007-06-30, Whiskers wrote:
    > On 2007-06-30, Jim Beard wrote:
    >> Whiskers wrote:


    [...]

    [later]

    Putting the missing file into the obvious place, hasn't helped.

    However, over in news.software.readers Neil Woods mentioned that the
    source tarball for tin includes "libcanlock" and a Build script to go with
    it, so following that lead I downloaded
    and
    extraced the /libcanlock/ directory from it (looks like a more recent
    version of canlock, too). That Build script /does/ run, and the hmactest
    and canlocktest scripts indicate that things are working, so I'll copy the
    libcanlock files I now have into a sensible location and see what happens
    when I compile slrn.

    After some sleep.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

  9. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:07:20 +0100, Whiskers wrote:

    > Putting the missing file into the obvious place, hasn't helped.


    > However, over in news.software.readers Neil Woods mentioned that the
    > source tarball for tin includes "libcanlock" and a Build script to go with
    > it, so following that lead I downloaded
    > and
    > extraced the /libcanlock/ directory from it (looks like a more recent
    > version of canlock, too). That Build script /does/ run, and the hmactest
    > and canlocktest scripts indicate that things are working, so I'll copy the
    > libcanlock files I now have into a sensible location and see what happens
    > when I compile slrn.


    Good for you. Well done.

    BTW, in RPM world that is called resolving a dependency issue which is a
    fuzzy way of saying that you found the required lib needed for the build.

    Take a look at man ldd sometime. It's a great tool for debugging binary
    executables. Of course they have to be already compiled.

    ....May the source be with you :-)

    --
    Linux Help: http://rsgibson.com/linux.htm
    Email - rsgibson@verizon.borg
    Replace borg with net


  10. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On 2007-06-30, Ron Gibson wrote:
    > On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 23:07:20 +0100, Whiskers wrote:
    >
    >> Putting the missing file into the obvious place, hasn't helped.

    >
    >> However, over in news.software.readers Neil Woods mentioned that the
    >> source tarball for tin includes "libcanlock" and a Build script to go with
    >> it, so following that lead I downloaded
    >> and
    >> extraced the /libcanlock/ directory from it (looks like a more recent
    >> version of canlock, too). That Build script /does/ run, and the hmactest
    >> and canlocktest scripts indicate that things are working, so I'll copy the
    >> libcanlock files I now have into a sensible location and see what happens
    >> when I compile slrn.

    >
    > Good for you. Well done.


    I merely whinged in appropriate places and got lucky with the
    responses ) (This exercise demonstrates the advantages of the Unix
    philosophy - using interchangeable components rather than monolithic
    programs - and also the possible pitfalls of all the different licenses in
    use).

    > BTW, in RPM world that is called resolving a dependency issue which is a
    > fuzzy way of saying that you found the required lib needed for the build.
    >
    > Take a look at man ldd sometime. It's a great tool for debugging binary
    > executables. Of course they have to be already compiled.
    >
    > ...May the source be with you :-)


    I'll start by getting more familiar with scripts, before I get into coding
    for binary executables.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

  11. Re: how can I install manually from a tarball?

    On 2007-06-30, Whiskers wrote:
    > On 2007-06-30, Jim Beard wrote:
    >> Whiskers wrote:
    >>> [mark@tavy canlock2b]$ ./Build
    >>> make: *** No rule to make target `t/sha1test.c', needed by `sha1test'. Stop.
    >>> rm -f src/*.o t/*.o t/*.out *.gmon gmon.*
    >>> [mark@tavy canlock2b]$

    >>
    >> This looks to me like either a makefile cannot find sha1test.c
    >> (needed to make sha1test.o) or an error was made in a makefile.
    >> See if you have a sha1test.c in the tree of source code files,
    >> and if so then look at the makefile (probably in the same
    >> directory) that should compile it to object code.
    >>
    >> If you do not have sha1test.c, you will either have to get
    >> that from another package or eliminate references to sha1test.*
    >> in the makefiles.
    >>
    >> This might be a problem with incomplete path names. When
    >> within canlock2b, you might try,
    >>
    >> CDPATH=$CDPATH:`pwd` ; export CDPATH
    >> and then try to build the thing.
    >>
    >> Cheers!
    >>
    >> jim b.

    >
    > Thanks for that. There is no sha1test.c file in the tarball, and no
    > sha1test.o already on my system or in any of the Mandriva RPMs known to my
    > urpmi.
    >
    > Some web delving lead me eventually to RFC 3174 which contains the 'code'
    > for a file of that name, so I've copy/pasted that into a file of that name
    > which I shall examine to correct any obvious (to my ignorant eye) copying
    > errors or typos and then place in the /src/ directory of canlock2b along
    > with the .c files already there, and have another go with make.
    >
    > Your clue has shed some light for me on how to read the makefile, although
    > it's still not far from being gibberish to me, but I think I may be able
    > to work out some more of it now. This is getting to be a bit like 'fun'.


    Sorry for letting this matter languish, but I never quite gave up. I've
    now installed Mdv2008, and canlock seems to be fine. I've also succesfully
    configured and installed Leafnode 2.

    However, slrn is not so fine (

    goes along well enough but finishes with this:

    In file included from /usr/include/sys/wait.h:80,
    from misc.c:84:
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:80: error: duplicate
    member __w_retcode
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:80: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:80: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:81: error: duplicate member __w_coredump
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:81: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:81: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:81: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:82: error: duplicate member __w_termsig
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:82: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:82: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:82: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:82: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:94: error: duplicate member __w_stopsig
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:94: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:94: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:95: error: duplicate member __w_stopval
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:95: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:95: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    /usr/include/bits/waitstatus.h:95: error: duplicate member ({anonymous})
    make[2]: *** [misc.o] Error 1
    make[2]: Leaving directory `/data/mark/Download/slrn/slrn-0.9.8.1pl1/src'
    make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
    make[1]: Leaving directory `/data/mark/Download/slrn/slrn-0.9.8.1pl1/src'
    make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1

    At which point I am once again flummoxed - and tempted to resort again to
    the Mandriva RPM for slrn. Meanwhile, I'm still using my Mdv2007 system.

    --
    -- ^^^^^^^^^^
    -- Whiskers
    -- ~~~~~~~~~~

+ Reply to Thread