On Tue, 26 Jun 2001, John R. Jackson wrote:
> >The production tape server machine is running Solaris2.6 and doesn't have
> >all of the marbles necessary (well it's missing lex at least) to configure
> >the Makefile. At this point, installing lex on the 2.6 box isn't an
> >option.
>
> Why? It's not privileged in any way, so you don't have to install
> it in any official place. Just build flex with prefix set to (e.g.)
> $HOME/flex, then make sure $HOME/flex/bin is in your PATH when you run
> the ./configure for Amanda and it will find and use it from there.
this machine *is* prvileged, but not in the normal sense. :) I think I'll
just have to break ranks on it and take care of this little prob.
> Are you sure /usr/ccs/bin/lex doesn't exist on the 2.6 system? Sun puts
> it in a very odd spot, although if you found it on 2.8 you probably
> already know that.
Ya, it's weird, but it ain't there. :(
> You might even do some serious cheating and drag the 2.8 version of lex
> over to the 2.6 machine in your PATH, but it might require some other
> files (I don't remember).
Hehehe, that might be worth a try.
> As Olivier said, no way would I try to build Amanda on a more recent OS
> version (of any type) and take it back to a previous version. You are
> just asking for trouble (shared library versions, in particular).
Ya, prob is we have 'compilation' machines where we do our compiling on
(we're a research/dev site), and this machine (the 2.6) isn't a
compilation machine, and so there's this disdain to do any of that stuff
on it.
> Another possibility is to build Amanda on the 2.8 system, run "make
> clean" there, then take that source tree over to the 2.6 system (use
> something like tar so the modification times stay the same) and try
> the build there. I don't think "make clean" will remove the .c files
> lex/flex and yacc/bison generate, so they should just be used. It's at
> least worth a shot.
I'll put it on my list just after the 'serious cheating' mentioned above.
> A variant would be to build Amanda on 2.8, then remove all the .o files
> (find . -name '*.o' -print | xargs rm) and tar that over to 2.6 and do
> the "make" again. Removing the .o's is more or less like "make clean",
> but "make clean" might have gotten rid of things you don't want it to.
>
> One other thing might bite you with this sequence. Running ./configure
> looks at your system for various things, such as where ufsdump is,
> where GNU tar is, how various OS calls work and so on. If the 2.6
> system doesn't behave the same (i.e. some paths are different or some
> system calls are not there), it could lead to trouble. Except for not
> having the right paths, I don't think this will be too bad for those
> two versions of Solaris (I go the other direction all the time, i.e.
> build on 2.6 but run on 2.7 and 2.8), but it's something to keep in mind
> (and yet another reason to do the whole sequence on the lowest common
> denominator machine it will end up running on).
Oh crap. Yeah that was in the back of my head... Hmph... lex on 2.6
(and buying beer for the pissed off coworkers) is looking better all the
time...
> >My configure line looks like this:
> >
> >./configure --with-user=amanda --with-group=backup --with-config=dailies
> >--host=sparc-sun-solaris2 --prefix=/usr/share/src/amanda-2.4.2p2/taipei
> >--exec-prefix=/usr/share/src/amanda-2.4.2p2/taipei
>
> FYI, you should not specify --host. Let ./configure figure it out.
Hmm, on one configure it didn't work, but just verifying that it was
reproduceable I can't. Nevermind. :)
> Also, --exec-prefix defaults to the same value as --prefix, so that's
> redundant.
K..
> >I used the prefix options to try to corral the files into one place, but
> >I'm not sure if any files go elsewhere and my brain fries at about that
> >point.
>
> All of the files "make install" deals with will be put under --prefix,
> although most go in subdirectories (e.g. $prefix/sbin, $prefix/libexec
> and so on).
>
> The Amanda configuration areas can also go under $prefix or can be put
> elsewhere. For instance, I use this:
>
> ./configure --prefix=/opt/amanda-2.4.2p2 --with-configdir=/var/amanda ...
>
> >Also, I know I have to 'make' as the amanda user, but I'm supposed to
> >'make install' as root because of some various files and stuff. If that's
> >the case shouldn't I be 'make'ing on the 2.6 box (named taipei) instead?
>
> I'm sure with enough work and experience you could eventually make it
> happy :-), but at some point it's not worth the hassle.
Hassle == bad.
Thanks for the email on this. I really needed it. heh... I'm gonna
think on it at lunch (and plot how I'll talk my way outta buying beer
while I'm at it)...
Cheers!
Chris
----
I'm a free-range carnivore.
