Hi, Thought I'd have a look at building FreeRADIUS RPMs. I advanced from RedHat to Debian over 15 years ago, so not at all familiar with their repositories etc now. So apologies if the below is just me being stupid. With CentOS 7 (which I believe is equivalent enough to RedHat) I get $ rpmbuild -bb redhat/freeradius.spec error: Failed build dependencies: hiredis-devel >= 0.10 is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 freetds-devel is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 $ Neither of these two packages seem to be in the standard CentOS repositories. Same issue on Scientific Linux, which is also RedHat based. The README is rather unhelpful, pointing to a (IMHO) far too long and unwieldy Red Hat FAQ on the wiki, which goes into all sorts of generic discussion about Red Hat, and not about building FreeRADIUS RPMs. The essential and unuseful gist being "don't build your own RPMs, use ours". Which would be fine if RedHat weren't stuck in the dark ages, and actually provided a recent FR. (I guess they're slightly up on Debian though.) I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs. Firstly, have I missed something? Are the two missing packages in the official repositories, and I just need to know something to get them available? If not, I'm guessing you have to add unofficial repositories? Seems crazy they don't support FreeTDS and REDIS though? Thoughts - - building RPMs should be as simple as possible for anyone; - you shouldn't have to add extra unofficial repositories to do so; - if other features not in the official repositories are needed, maybe a second "-extra" spec file with instructions on how to add the extra required repos; - the RedHat page on the wiki needs seriously sorting out in to separate pages of useful: "How to build FreeRADIUS RPMs for RedHat systems" and not useful: "Why you should pay RedHat for their own support and not use the FreeRADIUS source to build your own RPMs". Comments? Thanks, Matthew (getting totally fed up of "I'm using 2.1.12 or 3.0.4" on -users, and wanting something useful and easy to point people at...) -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
On my phone so a slightly terse reply - iirc hiredis is in epel - on centos install epel-release. Adam Bishop
On 21 Jul 2016, at 23:54, Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi,
Thought I'd have a look at building FreeRADIUS RPMs. I advanced from RedHat to Debian over 15 years ago, so not at all familiar with their repositories etc now. So apologies if the below is just me being stupid.
With CentOS 7 (which I believe is equivalent enough to RedHat) I get
$ rpmbuild -bb redhat/freeradius.spec error: Failed build dependencies: hiredis-devel >= 0.10 is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 freetds-devel is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 $
Neither of these two packages seem to be in the standard CentOS repositories. Same issue on Scientific Linux, which is also RedHat based.
The README is rather unhelpful, pointing to a (IMHO) far too long and unwieldy Red Hat FAQ on the wiki, which goes into all sorts of generic discussion about Red Hat, and not about building FreeRADIUS RPMs. The essential and unuseful gist being "don't build your own RPMs, use ours".
Which would be fine if RedHat weren't stuck in the dark ages, and actually provided a recent FR. (I guess they're slightly up on Debian though.)
I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs.
Firstly, have I missed something? Are the two missing packages in the official repositories, and I just need to know something to get them available?
If not, I'm guessing you have to add unofficial repositories? Seems crazy they don't support FreeTDS and REDIS though?
Thoughts -
- building RPMs should be as simple as possible for anyone;
- you shouldn't have to add extra unofficial repositories to do so;
- if other features not in the official repositories are needed, maybe a second "-extra" spec file with instructions on how to add the extra required repos;
- the RedHat page on the wiki needs seriously sorting out in to separate pages of useful: "How to build FreeRADIUS RPMs for RedHat systems" and not useful: "Why you should pay RedHat for their own support and not use the FreeRADIUS source to build your own RPMs".
Comments?
Thanks,
Matthew
(getting totally fed up of "I'm using 2.1.12 or 3.0.4" on -users, and wanting something useful and easy to point people at...)
-- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk>
Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part Sent from my iPhone
On Jul 21, 2016, at 5:59 PM, Adam Bishop <Adam.Bishop@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
On my phone so a slightly terse reply - iirc hiredis is in epel - on centos install epel-release.
Adam Bishop
On 21 Jul 2016, at 23:54, Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> wrote:
Hi,
Thought I'd have a look at building FreeRADIUS RPMs. I advanced from RedHat to Debian over 15 years ago, so not at all familiar with their repositories etc now. So apologies if the below is just me being stupid.
With CentOS 7 (which I believe is equivalent enough to RedHat) I get
$ rpmbuild -bb redhat/freeradius.spec error: Failed build dependencies: hiredis-devel >= 0.10 is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 freetds-devel is needed by freeradius-3.1.0-1.el7.centos.x86_64 $
Neither of these two packages seem to be in the standard CentOS repositories. Same issue on Scientific Linux, which is also RedHat based.
The README is rather unhelpful, pointing to a (IMHO) far too long and unwieldy Red Hat FAQ on the wiki, which goes into all sorts of generic discussion about Red Hat, and not about building FreeRADIUS RPMs. The essential and unuseful gist being "don't build your own RPMs, use ours".
Which would be fine if RedHat weren't stuck in the dark ages, and actually provided a recent FR. (I guess they're slightly up on Debian though.)
I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs.
Firstly, have I missed something? Are the two missing packages in the official repositories, and I just need to know something to get them available?
If not, I'm guessing you have to add unofficial repositories? Seems crazy they don't support FreeTDS and REDIS though?
Thoughts -
- building RPMs should be as simple as possible for anyone;
- you shouldn't have to add extra unofficial repositories to do so;
- if other features not in the official repositories are needed, maybe a second "-extra" spec file with instructions on how to add the extra required repos;
- the RedHat page on the wiki needs seriously sorting out in to separate pages of useful: "How to build FreeRADIUS RPMs for RedHat systems" and not useful: "Why you should pay RedHat for their own support and not use the FreeRADIUS source to build your own RPMs".
Comments?
Thanks,
Matthew
(getting totally fed up of "I'm using 2.1.12 or 3.0.4" on -users, and wanting something useful and easy to point people at...)
-- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk>
Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:04, Bruce Bauman <bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part
That’s actually not so bad :) http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#building-from-source_building-on-r... -Arran
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:24:25PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:04, Bruce Bauman <bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part
That’s actually not so bad :)
http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#building-from-source_building-on-r...
Hmm. That's what I did to get it working in Scientific Linux. Doesn't seem to be there in CentOS 7 :(. Maybe I installed the wrong version. Didn't want a GUI so installed "Core". But I'd expect it to have all the official repositories available though. Maybe the idea of a .spec file that Just Works is a dream :( Cheers, Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:32, Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:24:25PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:04, Bruce Bauman <bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part
That’s actually not so bad :)
http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#building-from-source_building-on-r...
Hmm. That's what I did to get it working in Scientific Linux.
Doesn't seem to be there in CentOS 7 :(.
Maybe I installed the wrong version. Didn't want a GUI so installed "Core". But I'd expect it to have all the official repositories available though.
Maybe the idea of a .spec file that Just Works is a dream :(
It is. Updates on wiki page. You should install the packages it lists. Those aren’t necessarily included when you yum install devtoolset-3 -Arran
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:39:36PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
Maybe the idea of a .spec file that Just Works is a dream :(
It is.
:(
Updates on wiki page. You should install the packages it lists. Those aren’t necessarily included when you yum install devtoolset-3
Thanks Arran :) Actually, thinking about it, most people should be building 3.0.x packages, which doesn't need C11, so shouldn't need devtoolset-3 yet. RPM build breaks doing other stuff now. I can cope with that... Cheers, Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
Hi,
Actually, thinking about it, most people should be building 3.0.x packages, which doesn't need C11, so shouldn't need devtoolset-3 yet.
well, really they should be using 3.1.x as thats just about to pop out 3.2.x, the next stable release...and if enough people arent using it we'll have nasty bugs/issues on 3.2.x release like we did for 2.2.x and 3.0.x :( and you should be using devtoolset-4 ;-) alan
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 08:49:02AM +0000, A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
Actually, thinking about it, most people should be building 3.0.x packages, which doesn't need C11, so shouldn't need devtoolset-3 yet.
well, really they should be using 3.1.x as thats just about to pop out 3.2.x, the next stable release...and if enough people arent using it we'll have nasty bugs/issues on 3.2.x release like we did for 2.2.x and 3.0.x :(
and you should be using devtoolset-4 ;-)
Don't really care which version they run or what compiler they use, as long as it's not 2.1.12 or 3.0.4 (or similar age) and it compiles. Most people want a "stable" release, so that means 3.0.11 or so. The general questions on the list of "foo is broken for me in 3.0.4", when foo is a small unlang syntax issue, they've not tested in 3.0.x, and they don't provide full debug output indicates to me that they're not good candidates for testing 3.1 or 4 in production... IMO anyway. Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 11:32:11PM +0100, Matthew Newton wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:24:25PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
On 21 Jul 2016, at 18:04, Bruce Bauman <bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part
That’s actually not so bad :)
http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#building-from-source_building-on-r...
Hmm. That's what I did to get it working in Scientific Linux.
Doesn't seem to be there in CentOS 7 :(.
OK, this is tedious. So you can do # yum install centos-release-scl-rh which seems to add some repositories, so you can then get devtoolset-3-gcc (gcc 4.9) and devtoolset-4-gcc (gcc 5). Then you do, as Adam said, # yum install epel-release and you then get freetds-devel and hiredis-devel available. Then you have to $ scl enable devtoolset-3 bash to get gcc available. And people pay to go through this. Thanks all - I'll be able to move forward a bit now. Maybe all that needs updating is the build documentation. Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:49:43PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
to get gcc available.
And people pay to go through this.
They suppress their gag reflex, and, with a large mouthful of RHEL dong, say, “But we only want to use the official RedHat supported version”.
And we're expected to support it :( Just successfully built 3.0.12 RPMs. List of commands to run is five times longer than Debian, but got there in the end. Cheers Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
Just out of curiousity, why not just include EPEL and use clang? I think the clang in the repo is new enough to compile 3.1.x and it seems like it's easier than installing the devtools gcc. Is there a downside to using clang? -- Bruce ________________________________ From: Freeradius-Devel <freeradius-devel-bounces+bbauman=rutgers.edu@lists.freeradius.org> on behalf of Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 7:10 PM To: FreeRadius developers mailing list Subject: Re: Building RPMs On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:49:43PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
to get gcc available.
And people pay to go through this.
They suppress their gag reflex, and, with a large mouthful of RHEL dong, say, "But we only want to use the official RedHat supported version".
And we're expected to support it :( Just successfully built 3.0.12 RPMs. List of commands to run is five times longer than Debian, but got there in the end. Cheers Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html FreeRADIUS -- developers' list info<http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html> www.freeradius.org Developers' List Information. The freeradius-devel mailing list is for developers of the FreeRADIUS server. There are a few house-rules to which we'd like everybody ...
To some organisations, EPEL is not acceptable as a repository because it's not curated by RedHat or people RedHat trusts. Stefan Paetow Moonshot Industry & Research Liaison Coordinator t: +44 (0)1235 822 125 gpg: 0x3FCE5142 xmpp: stefanp@jabber.dev.ja.net skype: stefan.paetow.janet jisc.ac.uk Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc¹s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. On 22/07/2016, 01:44, "Freeradius-Devel on behalf of Bruce Bauman" <freeradius-devel-bounces+stefan.paetow=jisc.ac.uk@lists.freeradius.org on behalf of bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
Just out of curiousity, why not just include EPEL and use clang?
I think the clang in the repo is new enough to compile 3.1.x and it seems like it's easier than installing the devtools gcc. Is there a downside to using clang?
-- Bruce
________________________________ From: Freeradius-Devel <freeradius-devel-bounces+bbauman=rutgers.edu@lists.freeradius.org> on behalf of Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 7:10 PM To: FreeRadius developers mailing list Subject: Re: Building RPMs
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:49:43PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
to get gcc available.
And people pay to go through this.
They suppress their gag reflex, and, with a large mouthful of RHEL dong, say, "But we only want to use the official RedHat supported version".
And we're expected to support it :(
Just successfully built 3.0.12 RPMs. List of commands to run is five times longer than Debian, but got there in the end.
Cheers
Matthew
-- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk>
Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html FreeRADIUS -- developers' list info<http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html> www.freeradius.org Developers' List Information. The freeradius-devel mailing list is for developers of the FreeRADIUS server. There are a few house-rules to which we'd like everybody ...
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
If it were me I would have a few versions of the spec file. Freeradius-rhelcentos.spec Freeradius-rhelcentosepel.spec As then if you don't have epel then you probably won't be using redis so that module can get removed. So that with pure rhel you can get a successful build. Otherwise just have comments in the spec saying if you don't want redis comment these lines out. Depends on how much you want to hold the hands either in the spec or in the wiki. On 22/07/2016 20:18, "Stefan Paetow" <Stefan.Paetow@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
To some organisations, EPEL is not acceptable as a repository because it's not curated by RedHat or people RedHat trusts.
Stefan Paetow Moonshot Industry & Research Liaison Coordinator
t: +44 (0)1235 822 125 gpg: 0x3FCE5142 xmpp: stefanp@jabber.dev.ja.net skype: stefan.paetow.janet
jisc.ac.uk
Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc¹s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
On 22/07/2016, 01:44, "Freeradius-Devel on behalf of Bruce Bauman" <freeradius-devel-bounces+stefan.paetow=jisc.ac.uk@lists.freeradius.org on behalf of bbauman@oit.rutgers.edu> wrote:
Just out of curiousity, why not just include EPEL and use clang?
I think the clang in the repo is new enough to compile 3.1.x and it seems like it's easier than installing the devtools gcc. Is there a downside to using clang?
-- Bruce
________________________________ From: Freeradius-Devel <freeradius-devel-bounces+bbauman=rutgers.edu@lists.freeradius.org> on behalf of Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 7:10 PM To: FreeRadius developers mailing list Subject: Re: Building RPMs
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:49:43PM -0400, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
to get gcc available.
And people pay to go through this.
They suppress their gag reflex, and, with a large mouthful of RHEL dong, say, "But we only want to use the official RedHat supported version".
And we're expected to support it :(
Just successfully built 3.0.12 RPMs. List of commands to run is five times longer than Debian, but got there in the end.
Cheers
Matthew
-- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk>
Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom
For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk> - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html FreeRADIUS -- developers' list info<http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html> www.freeradius.org Developers' List Information. The freeradius-devel mailing list is for developers of the FreeRADIUS server. There are a few house-rules to which we'd like everybody ...
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
- List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/devel.html
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 08:28:34PM +1200, Peter Lambrechtsen wrote:
If it were me I would have a few versions of the spec file. Freeradius-rhelcentos.spec Freeradius-rhelcentosepel.spec
As then if you don't have epel then you probably won't be using redis so that module can get removed. So that with pure rhel you can get a successful build.
That was exactly my thought. I'm just too unfamiliar with RedHat to know whether their repositories were too small or I was just missing something. I now know it's the former...
On 22/07/2016 20:18, "Stefan Paetow" <Stefan.Paetow@jisc.ac.uk> wrote:
To some organisations, EPEL is not acceptable as a repository because it's not curated by RedHat or people RedHat trusts.
Yeah, that's what I thought would be the case. On the other hand, they're probably the ones who desperately want feature X from 3.1.x, but wont shift from an official RedHat RPM. Cheers, Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
As then if you don't have epel then you probably won't be using redis so that module can get removed. So that with pure rhel you can get a successful build.
That was exactly my thought. I'm just too unfamiliar with RedHat to know whether their repositories were too small or I was just missing something.
The SPEC can be written such that if the packages are not available (as optional), then yes, you don't get those. But the SPEC in the FR distribution doesn't match the official RHEL version (in koji and RHEL's git) anyway... :-/
Yeah, that's what I thought would be the case.
On the other hand, they're probably the ones who desperately want feature X from 3.1.x, but wont shift from an official RedHat RPM.
Yes, but IMO that's a shortcoming on RHEL's part. This insistence on everything being patchable/patches (on RHEL's part) is counterproductive... I recall a conversation on here a few months ago where some more deeply-rooted changes had to be made to fix something and the patch for that would've been horrific. For a while I used to spin FR packages using the RHEL SPEC but the FR release to make sure that *we* had something up to date and RHEL-compliant for CentOS 6, but with the Moonshot repo containing an FR version now, I don't need that anymore. Stefan Paetow Moonshot Industry & Research Liaison Coordinator t: +44 (0)1235 822 125 gpg: 0x3FCE5142 xmpp: stefanp@jabber.dev.ja.net skype: stefan.paetow.janet jisc.ac.uk Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
Hi,
The SPEC can be written such that if the packages are not available (as optional), then yes, you don't get those. But the SPEC in the FR distribution doesn't match the official RHEL version (in koji and RHEL's git) anyway... :-/
I've updated the SPEC in the official GIt. I'm not going around hunting down random other SPEC files. if they are older and different and broken etc then thats their issue alan
On 22 Jul 2016, at 10:28, Peter Lambrechtsen <peter@crypt.nz> wrote:
If it were me I would have a few versions of the spec file. Freeradius-rhelcentos.spec Freeradius-rhelcentosepel.spec
It's not needed - rpmbuild accepts feature flags. e.g.: ... %if %{with epel} BuildRequires: epel-release %endif ... $ rpmbuild -bs freeradius.spec --with epel Regards, Adam Bishop gpg: 0x6609D460 jisc.ac.uk Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 09:35:49AM +0000, Adam Bishop wrote:
On 22 Jul 2016, at 10:28, Peter Lambrechtsen <peter@crypt.nz> wrote:
If it were me I would have a few versions of the spec file. Freeradius-rhelcentos.spec Freeradius-rhelcentosepel.spec
It's not needed - rpmbuild accepts feature flags.
That's very useful, thanks. Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
Hi, easier 'redhat friendly' way is simply build 'RedHst friendly' RPM without support for freetds and hiredis . therefore not EPEL needed on THEIR systems..... you only need the clang/GCC 4.x/5.x (devtoolset-3/4) on the build box. they dont need it on theirs. they just get RPM files. alan
On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 09:59:16PM +0000, Adam Bishop wrote:
On my phone so a slightly terse reply - iirc hiredis is in epel - on centos install epel-release.
OK thanks. I found that, but figured it wasn't official so didn't want to use it. It this one of those "RH is useless without EPEL" type things where everyone just installs it anyway? Like the first thing you did after installing Solairs was slap CSW on so the system felt sane (memories from 10 years ago; I never install Solaris now thankfully). On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 10:04:28PM +0000, Bruce Bauman wrote:
I think getting a modern compiler will be the trickiest part
CentOS 7, gcc 4.8.5. *sigh* Maybe it should just say "yum install debian" and the world would be a better place. What do people do? Is there a recent gcc in EPEL? I think on Scientific Linux I had to install devtoolset-3 or something like that (it was a few weeks ago), but that doesn't seem to be in CentOS so I guess it was a SL addon. Hmm, RH seems to have clang. Maybe the spec file should just use that instead. Thanks, Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
On 22 Jul 2016, at 00:28, Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> wrote: It this one of those "RH is useless without EPEL" type things where everyone just installs it anyway? Like the first thing you did after installing Solairs was slap CSW on so the system felt sane (memories from 10 years ago; I never install Solaris now thankfully).
Yup - it's managed by red hat as a community project so semi-official. It's usually one of the first thing for you want to install. Adam Bishop Jisc is a registered charity (number 1149740) and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under Company No. 5747339, VAT No. GB 197 0632 86. Jisc’s registered office is: One Castlepark, Tower Hill, Bristol, BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800. Jisc Services Limited is a wholly owned Jisc subsidiary and a company limited by guarantee which is registered in England under company number 2881024, VAT number GB 197 0632 86. The registered office is: One Castle Park, Tower Hill, Bristol BS2 0JA. T 0203 697 5800.
Hi,
On 22 Jul 2016, at 00:28, Matthew Newton <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> wrote: It this one of those "RH is useless without EPEL" type things where everyone just installs it anyway? Like the first thing you did after installing Solairs was slap CSW on so the system felt sane (memories from 10 years ago; I never install Solaris now thankfully).
Yup - it's managed by red hat as a community project so semi-official. It's usually one of the first thing for you want to install.
its semi official enough that on a fresh install you can just yum install epel-release you cant do that for many other 3rd party REPOs ;-) alan
Hi,
Thought I'd have a look at building FreeRADIUS RPMs. I advanced from RedHat to Debian over 15 years ago, so not at all familiar with their repositories etc now. So apologies if the below is just me being stupid.
welcome to some of the pain I went through earlier in the year (hence some of those GIT commits to the .spec file ! ;-) yes, EPEL is almost necessary.....and Scientific Linux is very handy for putting the devtools-4 package onto the system GCC 5.x nice.. ;-) (ensure you put it into system profile so you dont get burnt next time you log in! ;-)
I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs.
rpmbuild -bb - you just need the required dev packages installed first ;-)
Thoughts -
- building RPMs should be as simple as possible for anyone;
no. should be easy for competent people, 'anyone' should be able to just add FreeRADIUS via an RPM or repo. get latest 3.0.11 version via RPMs like many do with Debian/Ubunty PPA files.
- you shouldn't have to add extra unofficial repositories to do so;
ha! tell RadHat to up their game, provide modern versions of packages and to provide MORE of them :) I cant believe people PAY for RedHat :/
(getting totally fed up of "I'm using 2.1.12 or 3.0.4" on -users, and wanting something useful and easy to point people at...)
the answer is the FreeRADIUS build system - new RPMs need to be provided there. alan
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 08:47:37AM +0000, A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs.
rpmbuild -bb - you just need the required dev packages installed first ;-)
That's exactly my point. rpmbuild -bb doesn't "Just Work", and getting the required dev packages on is not really trivial from what I can tell. At least, not as trivial as a single "sudo mk-build-deps -ir debian/control". Added to the fact that rpmbuild seems to need its own special build directories to work in, and can't cope with making them itself.
Thoughts -
- building RPMs should be as simple as possible for anyone;
no. should be easy for competent people, 'anyone' should be able to just add FreeRADIUS via an RPM or repo. get latest 3.0.11 version via RPMs like many do with Debian/Ubunty PPA files.
Which leads you to the ancient issue of RedHat systems full of RPMs dragged in from all over the web. It turns into a complete dependency mess. If FreeRADIUS packages can't be built easily by an average sysadmin then I think that someone has failed. Either us getting the spec file and instructions wrong, or RedHat for making their build process too complicated so our instructions have to be too long.
- you shouldn't have to add extra unofficial repositories to do so;
ha! tell RadHat to up their game, provide modern versions of packages and to provide MORE of them :) I cant believe people PAY for RedHat :/
Well, quite. But that's a rant to be had over a pint instead. :)
(getting totally fed up of "I'm using 2.1.12 or 3.0.4" on -users, and wanting something useful and easy to point people at...)
the answer is the FreeRADIUS build system - new RPMs need to be provided there.
Official FR packages would obviously be good. But it's a big piece of work and Alan & co are fairly obviously too busy doing other great stuff. So the more we can all help to make life easier for them the better, IMO. And in part that means trying to cut down questions on the mailing lists. Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
Hi,
Official FR packages would obviously be good. But it's a big piece of work and Alan & co are fairly obviously too busy doing other great stuff. So the more we can all help to make life easier for
theres a FR build platform.... the rest of the world have nightly builds and stable one-off builds....can do the same here. alan
On 22/07/16 10:43, Matthew Newton wrote:
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 08:47:37AM +0000, A.L.M.Buxey@lboro.ac.uk wrote:
I think there should be an easy way for people to build RPMs, like you can .debs.
rpmbuild -bb - you just need the required dev packages installed first ;-)
That's exactly my point.
rpmbuild -bb doesn't "Just Work", and getting the required dev packages on is not really trivial from what I can tell. At least, not as trivial as a single "sudo mk-build-deps -ir debian/control
Yeah, building RPMs has always sucked. You probably won't like this, but... the "best" way to build an SRPM is, in my experience, mock. It builds and caches a clean system and then runs rpmbuild in it via chroot. It also lets you build for systems other than the one you're on, which is handy. If you have the BuildRequires: dependencies in the .spec correct and mock has the relevant repos, it'll all work. And since it generates a clean system, you won't end up with an RPM with a missing BuildRequires that's only working because you accidentally have the dependency installed. mock is how we build our local RPMs, FreeRADIUS included. I find it pretty straightforward once you've got mock setup.
On Fri, Jul 22, 2016 at 01:33:15PM +0100, Phil Mayers wrote:
On 22/07/16 10:43, Matthew Newton wrote:
rpmbuild -bb doesn't "Just Work", and getting the required dev packages on is not really trivial from what I can tell. At least, not as trivial as a single "sudo mk-build-deps -ir debian/control
Yeah, building RPMs has always sucked.
You probably won't like this, but... the "best" way to build an SRPM is, in my experience, mock. It builds and caches a clean system and then runs rpmbuild in it via chroot. It also lets you build for systems other than the one you're on, which is handy.
Sounds the same idea as Debian's 'sbuild'. Which similarly builds in a chroot so you get good clean packages. I've got instructions for that to go up on the wiki at some point. It's much better if you can use it or are deploying onto machines other than the one the packages were built on. Not sure either is the best for general sysadmins wanting up-to-date packages on their systems, but I think instructions for using them should be available where possible. Which reminds me to update the wiki with sbuild info... Cheers, Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. <mcn4@leicester.ac.uk> Systems Specialist, Infrastructure Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom For IT help contact helpdesk extn. 2253, <ithelp@le.ac.uk>
participants (8)
-
A.L.M.Buxey＠lboro.ac.uk -
Adam Bishop -
Arran Cudbard-Bell -
Bruce Bauman -
Matthew Newton -
Peter Lambrechtsen -
Phil Mayers -
Stefan Paetow