Re: upgrading freeradius
Am 27.01.2013 21:52, schrieb a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk: > Hi, > >> 2.1.10 is the version delivered by your distribution - and contains >> backported security bugfixes released until 2.2.0. In terms of security, >> your version is fine. > why? why do that? why not simple release 2.2.0 - you are CONFUSING your users > and CONFUSING those people who support them. > > if it says 2.1.10 then one can only ASSUME that its 2.1.10 Yes, somewhat true, but that's how a couple of distribution consider 'stable' releases: Stick with a version of a software and backport (bug and) security updates to this version. (and only update the version of a package at new distro release) Enterprise distributions or commercial unix often do much heavier backporting than what Debian/Ubuntu do, just to deliver the very same version during the period of time the package is bundled with a release of their distro/software. You have to outweight the advantages vs. disadvantages like breaking support from your distributor, in this case Canonical. But I agree that asking on this list is likely yield the answer "upgrade first" in case of problems. A Ubuntu PPA can be a very good thing - but you have to trust a third party. That said, I really like PPAs when the packagers do good work and care about updating the packages - thanks Fajar for maintaining this repository! -- Mathieu - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeradius
On Mon, Jan 28, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Matthew Newton wrote: > On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 08:51:28PM +, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote: >> > I have a working server running on version 2.1.10 > >> if you got your 2.1.10 from distribution...then you have to wait >> for your distro to catch up > > Actually, with Debian and Ubuntu, building new local packages of > the latest version is trivially easy, and the way I would > recommend upgrading. > > http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#Building-Debian-packages > Debian packages generated from FR source is mostly compatible with current Debian/Ubuntu packages. It's great for when used for new servers. There's a catch though: if you have upgrade current installation, there might be some things that needed manual tweaking (IIRC it was certificate-related). FR's debian recipe is based on some old version in Debian. Current Debian package has diverged somewhat, so you might see some minor differences (configuration, init script, pre/post install script, etc). If we ported ALL Debian/Ubuntu changes, it would mean build failure on some older systems. So for the 2.2.0 FR release I only backported ones that were essential and wouldn't break things. If you currently have an Ubuntu system running with 2.1.10, you might find my PPA to be more seamless for upgrading: https://launchpad.net/~freeradius/+archive/stable (yes, it's also mentioned in the wiki: http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Packages ). It takes a different approach, in that it takes current Debian/Ubuntu packages, and make necessary modification so that you can put 2.2.0 sources and have it build. Some of the changes were too intrusive to be included in the official source (for example, there are different recipes for Hardy/Lucid), but if you're just an end user that have no experience with building packages, you might find this one easier to use. > But of course if you roll your own packages you've got to watch > for security issues when they crop up, and rebuild yourself. With > distro supported packages they tend to patch up the security > issues, though you might be left with older non-security related > bugs unpatched. > > Like Alan wrote: if it says 2.1.10, you have no easy way of > guaranteeing all latest security patches have been applied. > > Popping up on this list and saying you're using an old version is > also likely to get you a lot of 'go away and upgrade' responses, > rather than answers to your question... If you have support from the Ubuntu, it might be better to stick with the provided version. But yes, when asking to this list, the most likely answer would be "upgrade". If one wants to stick to Ubuntu's provided version and wants to ask for security backports, better ask Canonical. -- Fajar - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeradius
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 08:51:28PM +, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote: > > I have a working server running on version 2.1.10 > if you got your 2.1.10 from distribution...then you have to wait > for your distro to catch up Actually, with Debian and Ubuntu, building new local packages of the latest version is trivially easy, and the way I would recommend upgrading. http://wiki.freeradius.org/building/Build#Building-Debian-packages But of course if you roll your own packages you've got to watch for security issues when they crop up, and rebuild yourself. With distro supported packages they tend to patch up the security issues, though you might be left with older non-security related bugs unpatched. Like Alan wrote: if it says 2.1.10, you have no easy way of guaranteeing all latest security patches have been applied. Popping up on this list and saying you're using an old version is also likely to get you a lot of 'go away and upgrade' responses, rather than answers to your question... Matthew -- Matthew Newton, Ph.D. Systems Architect (UNIX and Networks), Network Services, I.T. Services, University of Leicester, Leicester LE1 7RH, United Kingdom - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeradius
Hi, > 2.1.10 is the version delivered by your distribution - and contains > backported security bugfixes released until 2.2.0. In terms of security, > your version is fine. why? why do that? why not simple release 2.2.0 - you are CONFUSING your users and CONFUSING those people who support them. if it says 2.1.10 then one can only ASSUME that its 2.1.10 alan - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeradius
Hi, >I have a working server running on version 2.1.10 >I just saw that there is version 2.2.0 and i would like to ask if an >upgrade is a must >and where can i fined the documentation about how to do such a thing? self-build or installed via the distro? the answer to the initial question is YES. the new version has many security holes fixed and bugs fixed. regarding updating...i believe that 2.1.10 and 2.2.0 are almost 99.99% configuration compatible...so, if you built from source then a simple ./configure --with-whatever-options-you-used, make, make install will work - providing you check the docs to see which small configuration option is not compatible. if you got your 2.1.10 from distribution...then you have to wait for your distro to catch up - perhaps ask their support people when they will be making that version available for your distro (they will then, I hope, check your config doesnt have the offending line (if it does, I guess their installed will copy the old config file into a safe backup location and drop a copy with offending line removed back into place) alan - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeradius
Hi Am 27.01.2013 14:00, schrieb Tzvika Gelber: > I have a working server running on version 2.1.10 > I just saw that there is version 2.2.0 and i would like to ask if an > upgrade is a must > and where can i fined the documentation about how to do such a thing? > > My FR us running on Ubuntu 12.04. 2.1.10 is the version delivered by your distribution - and contains backported security bugfixes released until 2.2.0. In terms of security, your version is fine. You could move to 2.2.0, but that requires more work like: - building from source - look around for backported DEB packages (or build your own one) - moving to a newer (non-LTS version) of Ubuntu (will give you 2.1.12 right now) As long as you're not missing specific features or bugfixes only found after 2.1.10 was released, you can safely stay on that version. There are however circumstances where building from source gives the extra flexibility and bleeding edge code for your special use case, but that's not always outweighing the invested time to build and maintain it on your own. -- Mathieu - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
--- On Thu, 5/14/09, a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk wrote: > From: a.l.m.bu...@lboro.ac.uk > Subject: Re: Upgrading freeradius from source > To: "FreeRadius users mailing list" > Date: Thursday, May 14, 2009, 7:45 AM > Hi, > > > Software will always have flaws, defects, bugs or > whatever > > we call it. The way I understand the rpmbuild > process, > > it is not difficult to add a little patch which fixes > > the problem. > > ..or just wait for 2.1.6 which fixes the problem + many > other small > issues > No issues. I have made myself a own rpm for 2.1.4/2.1.5 for adapting the older SPECS. It's not perfect but good enough for my own consumption for the time being. Cheerse. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
Hi, > Software will always have flaws, defects, bugs or whatever > we call it. The way I understand the rpmbuild process, > it is not difficult to add a little patch which fixes > the problem. ..or just wait for 2.1.6 which fixes the problem + many other small issues alan - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
Ming-Ching Tiew wrote: > > > --- On Wed, 5/13/09, John Dennis wrote: > >> BTW, the 2.1.4/2.1.5 snafu is why >> the most recent >> RPM is 2.1.3. >> -- > > Software will always have flaws, defects, bugs or whatever > we call it. The way I understand the rpmbuild process, > it is not difficult to add a little patch which fixes > the problem. Of course it's easy to add a patch, but that's not the issue. There were 2 different versions of 2.1.4 tar file over a period of time. The second version of 2.1.4 identified itself internally as it built as 2.1.5 even though it's name was 2.1.4. RPM's are supposed to be built from pristine upstream sources and *must* be reproducible from upstream. So let's say you have a tar file whose name is freeradius-server-2.1.4.tar.bz which is being used to build an RPM, how do you know if that tar file was the original 2.1.4 or the subsequent 2.1.5 release which superseded it? It's ambiguous what the RPM version would be because it depends on the time window the freeradius-server-2.1.4.tar.bz was downloaded. The ambiguity with regards to what the actual version the RPM might produce is not acceptable. It's critical from a release perspective the version information be correct. The entire RPM build process depends on the assumption the tar file version matches the tar file contents which matches the RPM spec file version. It may be acceptable to you to privately build such an RPM but distributions cannot take that same risk. -- John Dennis Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
--- On Wed, 5/13/09, John Dennis wrote: > BTW, the 2.1.4/2.1.5 snafu is why > the most recent > RPM is 2.1.3. > -- Software will always have flaws, defects, bugs or whatever we call it. The way I understand the rpmbuild process, it is not difficult to add a little patch which fixes the problem. Regards. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
Nicolas Goutte wrote: > > Am 13.05.2009 um 11:06 schrieb Ivan Kalik: > >> 2.1.4/2.1.5 release had identity crises. 2.1.8. will be available in >> matter of days. It's on pre-release testing. > > I hope you mean 2.1.6 ;-) Yes, Ivan means 2.1.6. BTW, the 2.1.4/2.1.5 snafu is why the most recent RPM is 2.1.3. -- John Dennis Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
--- On Wed, 5/13/09, Ivan Kalik wrote: > From: Ivan Kalik > Subject: Re: Upgrading freeradius from source > To: "FreeRadius users mailing list" > Date: Wednesday, May 13, 2009, 9:06 AM > 2.1.4/2.1.5 release had identity > crises. 2.1.8. will be available in > matter of days. It's on pre-release testing. > > Catching up with releases is always a never ending game, and each version can take up a lot of resources to prove to be stable for production use. Are there major defects with 2.1.4 which resulting in quick subsequent new releases ? Regards. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
Am 13.05.2009 um 11:06 schrieb Ivan Kalik: 2.1.4/2.1.5 release had identity crises. 2.1.8. will be available in matter of days. It's on pre-release testing. I hope you mean 2.1.6 ;-) Ivan Kalik Kalik Informatika ISP --- On Tue, 5/12/09, John Dennis wrote: I think you'll save yourself a lot of headaches if you stick with RPM based packages. If the version of FreeRADIUS is not available as an RPM for the version of the distro you're using then you can find instructions for how to download, build and install the *RPM* for a current version here: http://wiki.freeradius.org/Red_Hat_FAQ I can't find a SOURCE RPM for 2.1.4 yet for fedora. I tried one of those 2.1.3 rpm, it works perfectly on my older fedora distro, even though it seem to indicate that they are for newer fedora. So I guess I have to wait a little longer. Regards. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/ users.html Nicolas Goutte extragroup GmbH - Karlsruhe Waldstr. 49 76133 Karlsruhe Germany Geschäftsführer: Stephan Mönninghoff, Hans Martin Kern, Tilman Haerdle Registergericht: Amtsgericht Münster / HRB: 5624 Steuer Nr.: 337/5903/0421 / UstID: DE 204607841 - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
2.1.4/2.1.5 release had identity crises. 2.1.8. will be available in matter of days. It's on pre-release testing. Ivan Kalik Kalik Informatika ISP > > > > --- On Tue, 5/12/09, John Dennis wrote: > >> >> I think you'll save yourself a lot of headaches if you >> stick with RPM >> based packages. If the version of FreeRADIUS is not >> available as an RPM >> for the version of the distro you're using then you can >> find >> instructions for how to download, build and install the >> *RPM* for a >> current version here: >> >> http://wiki.freeradius.org/Red_Hat_FAQ >> >> > > I can't find a SOURCE RPM for 2.1.4 yet for fedora. > I tried one of those 2.1.3 rpm, it works perfectly on my > older fedora distro, even though it seem to indicate > that they are for newer fedora. So I guess I have > to wait a little longer. > > Regards. > > > > > > - > List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See > http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html > - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
--- On Tue, 5/12/09, John Dennis wrote: > > I think you'll save yourself a lot of headaches if you > stick with RPM > based packages. If the version of FreeRADIUS is not > available as an RPM > for the version of the distro you're using then you can > find > instructions for how to download, build and install the > *RPM* for a > current version here: > > http://wiki.freeradius.org/Red_Hat_FAQ > > I can't find a SOURCE RPM for 2.1.4 yet for fedora. I tried one of those 2.1.3 rpm, it works perfectly on my older fedora distro, even though it seem to indicate that they are for newer fedora. So I guess I have to wait a little longer. Regards. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
mct...@yahoo.com wrote: > > I have done some testing on 2.1.4 and I like the flexibility > comparing to 1.x. > > Unfortunately, I am using for production a pretty old distribution > 1.1.7. For such an old distro, it's almost impossible to do an > upgrade and still maintaining the rpm package info and what not, > so I am considering upgrading by compiling from source, ie > configure and make install. Hmm... 1.1.7 RPM makes it sound like an old Fedora release. Alan gave you some good suggestions about the 1.x to 2.x upgrade, I have a suggestion about building and packages. It's always possible to build from source, but it has some downsides, you'll need to make sure all your build prerequisites are satisfied, you've passed all the right values to "configure", not the least of which is to assure the install path information is correct, you've fully removed the old RPM so there aren't conflicts and then when you're done you'll have lost all the advantages of having a package manager (e.g. rpm) which tracks dependencies, watches for conflicts, and knows the version of software installed on the system, sets the right file permissions and SELinux labeling. Plus the source RPM (SRPM) will have any patches applied which are necessary. I think you'll save yourself a lot of headaches if you stick with RPM based packages. If the version of FreeRADIUS is not available as an RPM for the version of the distro you're using then you can find instructions for how to download, build and install the *RPM* for a current version here: http://wiki.freeradius.org/Red_Hat_FAQ > Any thing I should consider before I have go down to this path ? -- John Dennis Looking to carve out IT costs? www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/ - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius from source
mct...@yahoo.com wrote: > Unfortunately, I am using for production a pretty old distribution > 1.1.7. For such an old distro, it's almost impossible to do an > upgrade and still maintaining the rpm package info and what not, > so I am considering upgrading by compiling from source, ie > configure and make install. > > Any thing I should consider before I have go down to this path ? It won't over-write your existing configuration. Ensure that you're using "Cleartext-Password := ...", and not "User-Password ==" It may be safer to *migrate* your existing configuration. The configuration files are relatively small, so this shouldn't take long. i.e. go through the configuration files, comparing the old to the new (default) files. Where they are different, add your configuration, OR examine your configuration to see if it's still necessary. The goal of 2.x is to have it *largely* compatible with 1.x, but there are differences. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeRADIUS
vicky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What am I missing? If you're not going to use rlm_x99_token, just delete that directory. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeRADIUS
Hi, > I built the code in a "clean" directory so to say. There was nothing in > /opt/freeradius1.0.2/ before I made > #./configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius1.0.2/ > I just reset everything and retried, but still the same compilation > error. Do you have any other suggestions? looks like it cant find the OpenSSL includes. do you have openssl-devel installed? if not, try adding --with-openssl-includes=/usr/include/openssl (or wherever you can find openssl/des.h (try 'locate ssl/des.h' ) ) Alan - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeRADIUS
Rupak, I built the code in a "clean" directory so to say. There was nothing in /opt/freeradius1.0.2/ before I made #./configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius1.0.2/ I just reset everything and retried, but still the same compilation error. Do you have any other suggestions? Thanks a lot! Vicky Rupak wrote: I also had the same problem.Later on I came to know that I had to again ./configure --prefix=- to another fresh unpacked tarball.Not in the old unpacked tar ball.just again try tar -xvf freeradius-1.0.2.tar and again ./configure then make then again make install. This time try and give another directory in --prefix section.when I had faced this problem I even formatted my box.Thanx that it was an isolated machine. Rupak Hi Stéphane (and all the others of course), Thats is what I was trying to do, configure and install the new version elsewhere but still on the same machine (I'm gonna set the default ports to something else so there will be no conflicts). Now I've downloaded version 1.0.2 and I get a compilation error. I do : #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius1.0.2 #make and in the end of the compilation output I get this... In file included from x99_rlm.c:54: x99.h:26:42: openssl/des.h: No such file or directory gmake[6]: *** [x99_rlm.o] Error 1 gmake[6]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules/rlm_x99_token' gmake[5]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[5]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[4]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[4]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[3]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[2]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[1]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2' make: *** [all] Error 2 zsh: exit 2 make What am I missing? Cheers Vicky DELORT Stephane wrote: Hello Vicky, Haven't you try to copy your config files and do the upgrade on a test system ? (create an exact replica on another machine and upgrade it) I think it would be useful to post an "howto to upgrade from xxx to yyy" once you've done it. regards, Stéphane -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de vicky Envoyé : mardi 31 mai 2005 11:31 À : FreeRadius users mailing list Objet : upgrading freeRADIUS Hi list subscribers, hi list admins, (again) I'm running a freeRADIUS server version 0.8.1 (I know it is ancient) and I want to upgrade it to the latest version available. I have been trying to find some kind of procedure to upgrading but with no success. Does anyone know how to (in a fairly simple way) safely upgrade? The safetyness is very crucial, I cant risk overwriting my old configuration. The old server is built with #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius #make #su #make install Thanks to you all in advance and please notice that I'm not that of an expert on RADIUS... Keep up the good work! - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
RE: upgrading freeRADIUS
I also had the same problem.Later on I came to know that I had to again ./configure --prefix=- to another fresh unpacked tarball.Not in the old unpacked tar ball.just again try tar -xvf freeradius-1.0.2.tar and again ./configure then make then again make install. This time try and give another directory in --prefix section.when I had faced this problem I even formatted my box.Thanx that it was an isolated machine. Rupak Hi Stéphane (and all the others of course), Thats is what I was trying to do, configure and install the new version elsewhere but still on the same machine (I'm gonna set the default ports to something else so there will be no conflicts). Now I've downloaded version 1.0.2 and I get a compilation error. I do : #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius1.0.2 #make and in the end of the compilation output I get this... In file included from x99_rlm.c:54: x99.h:26:42: openssl/des.h: No such file or directory gmake[6]: *** [x99_rlm.o] Error 1 gmake[6]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules/rlm_x99_token' gmake[5]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[5]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[4]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[4]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[3]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[2]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[1]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2' make: *** [all] Error 2 zsh: exit 2 make What am I missing? Cheers Vicky DELORT Stephane wrote: >Hello Vicky, > >Haven't you try to copy your config files and do the upgrade on a test system ? >(create an exact replica on another machine and upgrade it) >I think it would be useful to post an "howto to upgrade from xxx to yyy" once you've done it. > >regards, >Stéphane > > > >-Message d'origine- >De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de >vicky >Envoyé : mardi 31 mai 2005 11:31 >À : FreeRadius users mailing list >Objet : upgrading freeRADIUS > > >Hi list subscribers, hi list admins, (again) > >I'm running a freeRADIUS server version 0.8.1 (I know it is ancient) and >I want to upgrade it to the latest version available. I have been trying >to find some kind of procedure to upgrading but with no success. Does >anyone know how to (in a fairly simple way) safely upgrade? The >safetyness is very crucial, I cant risk overwriting my old configuration. > >The old server is built with >#configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius >#make >#su >#make install > >Thanks to you all in advance and please notice that I'm not that of an >expert on RADIUS... > >Keep up the good work! > > > -- Vicky El Fhaily Integration Manager TRUSTIVE (France) WTC 2, Les Bouillides 120, Route des Macarons Parc de Sophia Antipolis 06560 Valbonne, France Phone: +33 493 65 25 63 Fax: +33 493 65 21 56 www.trustive.com / www.corp.trustive.com - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html __ NOD32 1. (20050527) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.nod32.com - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: upgrading freeRADIUS
Hi Stéphane (and all the others of course), Thats is what I was trying to do, configure and install the new version elsewhere but still on the same machine (I'm gonna set the default ports to something else so there will be no conflicts). Now I've downloaded version 1.0.2 and I get a compilation error. I do : #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius1.0.2 #make and in the end of the compilation output I get this... In file included from x99_rlm.c:54: x99.h:26:42: openssl/des.h: No such file or directory gmake[6]: *** [x99_rlm.o] Error 1 gmake[6]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules/rlm_x99_token' gmake[5]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[5]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[4]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[4]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src/modules' gmake[3]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[3]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[2]: *** [all] Error 2 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2/src' gmake[1]: *** [common] Error 1 gmake[1]: Leaving directory `/home/vicky/freeradius-1.0.2' make: *** [all] Error 2 zsh: exit 2 make What am I missing? Cheers Vicky DELORT Stephane wrote: Hello Vicky, Haven't you try to copy your config files and do the upgrade on a test system ? (create an exact replica on another machine and upgrade it) I think it would be useful to post an "howto to upgrade from xxx to yyy" once you've done it. regards, Stéphane -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de vicky Envoyé : mardi 31 mai 2005 11:31 À : FreeRadius users mailing list Objet : upgrading freeRADIUS Hi list subscribers, hi list admins, (again) I'm running a freeRADIUS server version 0.8.1 (I know it is ancient) and I want to upgrade it to the latest version available. I have been trying to find some kind of procedure to upgrading but with no success. Does anyone know how to (in a fairly simple way) safely upgrade? The safetyness is very crucial, I cant risk overwriting my old configuration. The old server is built with #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius #make #su #make install Thanks to you all in advance and please notice that I'm not that of an expert on RADIUS... Keep up the good work! -- Vicky El Fhaily Integration Manager TRUSTIVE (France) WTC 2, Les Bouillides 120, Route des Macarons Parc de Sophia Antipolis 06560 Valbonne, France Phone: +33 493 65 25 63 Fax: +33 493 65 21 56 www.trustive.com / www.corp.trustive.com - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
RE: upgrading freeRADIUS
Hello Vicky, Haven't you try to copy your config files and do the upgrade on a test system ? (create an exact replica on another machine and upgrade it) I think it would be useful to post an "howto to upgrade from xxx to yyy" once you've done it. regards, Stéphane -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] la part de vicky Envoyé : mardi 31 mai 2005 11:31 À : FreeRadius users mailing list Objet : upgrading freeRADIUS Hi list subscribers, hi list admins, (again) I'm running a freeRADIUS server version 0.8.1 (I know it is ancient) and I want to upgrade it to the latest version available. I have been trying to find some kind of procedure to upgrading but with no success. Does anyone know how to (in a fairly simple way) safely upgrade? The safetyness is very crucial, I cant risk overwriting my old configuration. The old server is built with #configure --prefix=/opt/freeradius #make #su #make install Thanks to you all in advance and please notice that I'm not that of an expert on RADIUS... Keep up the good work! -- Vicky - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius 1.0.2 with freeradius-snapshot-20050502
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hampson) wrote: > Well, I've just been handed some rlm_sql (possible) security bugs, > which I'm going to look hard at this weekend. Then we can release > 1.0.3. Ok. I think they should be fixed, but I don't think they're critical. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius 1.0.2 with freeradius-snapshot-20050502
On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 01:05:33PM -0400, Alan DeKok wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hampson) wrote: > > Which will give you the current 1.0.3 candidate. Then you can cvs update > > whenever something else comitted to it. > We should probably release 1.0.3 soon. Well, I've just been handed some rlm_sql (possible) security bugs, which I'm going to look hard at this weekend. Then we can release 1.0.3. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=307720 > > you won't get the files that Debian cannot distribute as free > > software... That's only later RFCs as I recall. > That still bugs me. The documents say if you edit them you can't > claim they're RFC's. Other than that, distribution is unlimited. > There is no conflict with the GPL. It's not a GPL issue, it's a DFSG issue. > Oh well. There have been enough flame wars about this on the debian > lists already. Yeah. The old adage about poking sleeping crocodiles... > > I think the CVS snapshots at the moment are in flux... If > > not, you're the second person I've seen hit this, so... Hmm. > It's fixed. The CVS snapshot now does IPv6, among other changes. Excellent. ^_^ I guess I better get off my ass and convert it to dpatch at some point before it ships. -- Paul "TBBle" Hampson, on an alternate email client. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius 1.0.2 with freeradius-snapshot-20050502
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul Hampson) wrote: > Which will give you the current 1.0.3 candidate. Then you can cvs update > whenever something else comitted to it. We should probably release 1.0.3 soon. > you won't get the files that Debian cannot distribute as free > software... That's only later RFCs as I recall. That still bugs me. The documents say if you edit them you can't claim they're RFC's. Other than that, distribution is unlimited. There is no conflict with the GPL. Oh well. There have been enough flame wars about this on the debian lists already. > I think the CVS snapshots at the moment are in flux... If > not, you're the second person I've seen hit this, so... Hmm. It's fixed. The CVS snapshot now does IPv6, among other changes. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading freeradius 1.0.2 with freeradius-snapshot-20050502
On Mon, May 02, 2005 at 10:54:39PM -0700, Abdul Lateef wrote: > Hi guys, > I installed freeradius 1.0.2 on my redhat box. all > thing is working well. > But there is some error like: > Mon May 2 14:43:09 2005 : Error: Exec-Program: > Abnormal child exit: No child processes > Mon May 2 15:06:36 2005 : Error: Dropping conflicting > packet from client 10.0.0.28:1812 - ID: 12 due to > unfinished request 2065 > In radius log file. > I read more threads about this error, and at last i > found, that i have to upgrade with snapshot. > I don't have any idea how to upgrade but for the test > I downloaded it from the web site and i tried to > install using following commond: http://www.freeradius.org/development.html#cvs Best thing to do would be... cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/source login (CVS password: anoncvs) cvs -d :pserver:[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/source checkout -j release_1_0 radiusd Which will give you the current 1.0.3 candidate. Then you can cvs update whenever something else comitted to it. Alternatively, you can grab the source and patch for Debian's 1.0.2-3 from your nearest debian mirror (That's pool/main/f/freeradius/, grab freeradius_1.0.2-3.diff.gz and freeradius_1.0.2.orig.tar.gz) although you won't get the files that Debian cannot distribute as free software... That's only later RFCs as I recall. Of course, if you were running Debian this fix would be only an apt-get away. ^_^ > $ ./configure > $ make install > > But when i am running make. I found 2 error which i am > going to post following > macsha1.c -fPIC -DPIC -o .libs/hmacsha1.o > In file included from hmacsha1.c:15: > ../include/sha1.h:15: syntax error before "uint32_t" > ../include/sha1.h:15: warning: no semicolon at end of I think the CVS snapshots at the moment are in flux... If not, you're the second person I've seen hit this, so... Hmm. -- Paul "TBBle" Hampson, on an alternate email client. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Re: Upgrading FreeRadius
"Jamal Taweel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kindly advice with requested steps to upgrade the FreeRADIUS version > from 0.9.3 to 1.0.2. configure & install it like normal. Your configuration files will NOT get changed. You MAY have to update the configuration files by hand to work with the newer version. > And how can we uninstall the previous version. 'rm' the modules (rlm_*). > Also when we tried to install Daemontools on Linux after executing=20 > Package/install command, the following errors appear: Sorry, I know nothing about daemontools. Alan DeKok. - List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
