Eek! Looks like my update didn't make it... I did get it to compile
and I think it's working... Yay!
On Mon, Nov 20, 2000 at 12:19:38AM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 07:16:07PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > > I serioulsy suggest that you downgrade to your OS's lates
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 07:16:07PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > I serioulsy suggest that you downgrade to your OS's latest supported glibc,
> > unless there is a specific reason you need a later one. Building glibc from
> > source is not for amateurs.
> >
> I think I've done just that:
>
>
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 09:20:42PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:47:39PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > > Is there any reason you can't get a 2.2 SuSE RPM?
> >
> > Hmmm... They have an update to shlibs, which I think includes glibc.
> > They also have a few other u
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:47:39PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > Is there any reason you can't get a 2.2 SuSE RPM?
>
> Hmmm... They have an update to shlibs, which I think includes glibc.
> They also have a few other updates that look relevant. In particular,
> they have nssv1.
>
> So I ins
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 07:53:31PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
> X-Operating-System: Linux
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:40:01PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > Ooo... I can't rule this out at all, mainly because I don't know
> > enough.
> >
> > I built glibc 2.2 from source.
>
> Uh, bad idea.
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:40:01PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> Ooo... I can't rule this out at all, mainly because I don't know
> enough.
>
> I built glibc 2.2 from source.
Uh, bad idea. Is there any reason you can't get a 2.2 SuSE RPM? Is there
any reason you particularly need 2.2?
> It
With the attachment this time...
Thanks!
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:40:01PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:53:51PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 01:56:10PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > > Indeed. [Sigh...] Still no joy. Any other id
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:53:51PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 01:56:10PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > Indeed. [Sigh...] Still no joy. Any other ideas?
> >
> > The symptoms at "make setup check" remain:
> >
> > ./load qmail-remote control.o constmap.o timeoutrea
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 01:56:10PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> Indeed. [Sigh...] Still no joy. Any other ideas?
>
> The symptoms at "make setup check" remain:
>
> ./load qmail-remote control.o constmap.o timeoutread.o \
> timeoutwrite.o timeoutconn.o tcpto.o now.o dns.o ip.o \
> ipalloc.o i
man, the problems is doubtless from the forementioned lib.
doubt someone has been messing with your ld path but try
[root@morgoth /root]# ldconfig -v | grep libresolv
ldconfig: Path `/usr/lib' given more than once
libresolv.so.2 -> libresolv-2.1.92.so
[root@morgoth /root]# ldconfig -v |
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 04:15:49PM -0500, Adam McKenna wrote:
>
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 12:35:07PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> > On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:20:35PM +0100, Erwin Hoffmann wrote:
> > >
> > > problems regarding with SUSE 7.0 are not known to me.
> > > What may be the case is wh
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 12:35:07PM -0800, David Benfell wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:20:35PM +0100, Erwin Hoffmann wrote:
> >
> > problems regarding with SUSE 7.0 are not known to me.
> > What may be the case is whether you have IPv6 support enabled or not.
> >
> > Disable it.
> >
> You
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 05:20:35PM +0100, Erwin Hoffmann wrote:
>
> problems regarding with SUSE 7.0 are not known to me.
> What may be the case is whether you have IPv6 support enabled or not.
>
> Disable it.
>
You might be on to something. I grabbed a .config file from somebody
else. Sure
On Sun, Nov 19, 2000 at 03:46:59PM +, Jose AP Celestino wrote:
>
> And the problem persists? Isn't /usr/lib/libresolv.so a broken symlink? Check it
> out please.
>
Assuming I'm following the links correctly:
benfell:/usr/local/src # ls -al /usr/lib/libresolv.so /lib/libresolv.so.2
-rwxr-xr-
Hi,
problems regarding with SUSE 7.0 are not known to me.
What may be the case is whether you have IPv6 support enabled or not.
Disable it.
cheers.
eh.
At 15:46 19.11.2000 +, Jose AP Celestino wrote:
>And the problem persists? Isn't /usr/lib/libresolv.so a broken symlink?
Check it
>out p
And the problem persists? Isn't /usr/lib/libresolv.so a broken symlink? Check it
out please.
David Benfell wrote:
> Thanks Jose, but...
>
> On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 09:40:42PM +, Jose AP Celestino wrote:
> >
> > The make process fails to find the named (literally) functions. The functions
> >
Thanks Jose, but...
On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 09:40:42PM +, Jose AP Celestino wrote:
>
> The make process fails to find the named (literally) functions. The functions
> raising the errors are located at the
>
> libresolv
>
> libs. At my system: /usr/lib/libresolv.so -> /lib/libresolv.so.2 ->
The make process fails to find the named (literally) functions. The functions
raising the errors are located at the
libresolv
libs. At my system: /usr/lib/libresolv.so -> /lib/libresolv.so.2 ->
/lib/libresolv-2.1.92.so.
Hmmm, have you installed the glibc? Of course you have. So where are the
li
Hello,
I've already got qmail running on a couple machines so I was stunned
when I hit this.
My employer issued me a laptop. I'm putting qmail on it. So I get to
"make setup check" and I get the attached output.
I looked in the archive. The only thing I could find that seemed
close was for a
19 matches
Mail list logo
