-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 
James Kosin wrote:
| Brian Morrison wrote:
| | On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 20:38:21 +0300
| | Török Edwin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| |
| |> Brian Morrison wrote:
| |>> Török Edwin wrote:
| |>>   
| |>>> Brian Morrison wrote:
| |>>>     
| |>>>> I've just built and installed 0.93, when the new versions try and
| start
| |>>>> I get this error:
| |>>>>
| |>>>> /usr/sbin/clamd: relocation error: /usr/libclamav.so.4: undefined
| |>>>> symbol: rarvm_free
| |>>>>
| |>>>> A grep through the source doesn't appear to show anything obvious
| to me
| |>>>> anyway, the system in use is RH9 BTW, patched up to date but of 
course
| |>>>> out of support for some time. The rpm build process completed 
without
| |>>>> errors.
| |>>>>
| |>>>> Back to 0.92.1 for now.
| |>>>>
| |>>>> Any ideas?
| |>>>>       
| |>>> Did you install libclamunrar_iface.so, and libclamunrar.so?
| |>>>     
| |>> Yes, the rpm build script packaged them correctly, they're in the 
rpm if
| |>> I look with rpm -qpl <package> and clamav-0.92.1 also has these
| |>> installed on my system, it was built using the same rpm build script.
| |>>
| |>> I'm wondering if somehow it's not picking up something from a header
| |>> file, I have the -devel package installed for 0.92.1 but I'm building
| |>> using the files supplied in the tarball so the new version should have
| |>> everything it needs.
| |> Can you try to build manually? Just a simple ./configure && make; and
| |> then run clamd/clamd.
| |> Please upload the build logs somewhere (or open a bugreport on 
bugzilla).
| |
| | I built using ./configure and make, after passing the
| | --enable-experimental argument, and then ran ldd clamd/clamd as a
| | check, but it immediately tells me that the program is not a dynamic
| | executable, which implies it doesn't link to shared libraries I think.
| | I also pass --without milter to avoid building the milter files.
| |
| | When I build from my spec file, this is what it passes to configure:
| |
| | %configure \
| |     --program-prefix=%{?_program_prefix} \
| |     %{!?_without_milter:--enable-milter} \
| |     --enable-dns \
| |     --with-libcurl \
| |     --disable-clamav \
| |     --enable-id-check \
| |     --with-user=clamav \
| |     --with-group=clamav \
| | #    --disable-zlib-vcheck \
| |     --enable-experimental \
| |     --with-dbdir=%{_localstatedir}/lib/clamav
| | %{__make}
| |
| | the origin of the spec file was from Petr Krisztof back in the late
| | RH8/RH9/Fedora 1 days, it's always worked for me with a few changes to
| | package new files as they appeared.
| |
| | This has worked up to and including 0.92.1, and indeed the 0.93 version
| | builds OK, it just won't run. I can't see how this happens as all
| | the .so libraries are correctly linked and versioned, and are installed
| | in the right place. There is only one copy of libclam*.so* on the whole
| | system.
| |
| | Not sure what is happening here. Too tired to debug this any more
| | tonight, maybe I'll wait for the DAG rpms and try those.
| |
| I think I have a clue.
| For some reason, clamav is linking against the old version of
| libclamunrar_iface.so.3 file.  I'll try uninstalling the old version of
| clamav and try rebuilding fresh to see if that makes a difference.
| I'm using the same .spec file you are; only I also install from RPM.
|
| James
Well, that did the trick.
I un-installed the old version before building and that fixed the 
dependency issue.

James
_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
iEYEARECAAYFAkgE+w8ACgkQkNLDmnu1kSnygwCeJideW7hmWe7Uz5fhULOo5Xyq
c9AAn1n8+IjB3DgpQ7ReGK1kwU9Rry9T
=utWY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

_______________________________________________
Help us build a comprehensive ClamAV guide: visit http://wiki.clamav.net
http://lurker.clamav.net/list/clamav-users.html

Reply via email to