jdennis at redhat.com
Thu Jul 25 14:45:03 CEST 2013
On 07/24/2013 10:33 PM, Bill Schoolfield wrote:
> DoWe have developed a module that we intend to include in our rpm
> package. For licensing reasons we will not be distributing freeradius
> itself. Instead the freeradius rpm will be a pre-requisite.
> It would be nice if the binary packages provided enough files to build a
> module. Library files are there, but other needed build and compile
> files are not. I assume that this is not in the cards in any future
> Our concern is the build process. As it is now we have the install the
> tarball, build it, then build our module. Doable yes.
> Can you see a better way?
Which rpms for which distribution? Being specific makes it much easier
to answer questions.
If you're referring to Red Hat freeradius rpm's then yes you're correct,
there is no devel package with the 2.x series because the header files
are not multilib safe. I believe Arran has just recently corrected this
for the upcoming 3.0 release, if so then the 3.0 rpm's will include a
Would you please explain the licensing concerns you have?
More information about the Freeradius-Devel