Install the freeradius-libs first.
>rpm -ivh freeradius-2.1.1-7.x86_64.rpm
>error: Failed dependencies:
>libfreeradius-eap-2.1.1.so()(64bit) is needed by
>freeradius-2.1.1-7.x86_64
>libfreeradius-radius-2.1.1.so()(64bit) is needed by
>freeradius-2.1.1-7.x86_64
-
List info/subscri
On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 09:44:08AM -0800, J Santos wrote:
> I 've followed the faq instructions and I have now the following packages
> available.
>
> freeradius-2.1.1-7.x86_64.rpmfreeradius-perl-2.1.1-7.x86_64.rpm
> freeradius-devel-2.1.1-7.x86_64.rpm
> freeradius-postgresql-2.1.1-7.x86
t; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> s.org
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> reeradius.org] On Behalf Of John Dennis
> Sent: Monday, December 01, 2008 3:56 PM
> To: FreeRadius users mailing list
> Subject: Building & Installing on Red Hat Systems (Was: Make
> error - Solved)
>
>
&g
Hi,
> The current version of FreeRADIUS in RHEL5/CentOS is 1.1.3. It is very
> unlikely the 1.1.3 version will ever be removed from RHEL5 because of
> the commitment for version stability in an enterprise distribution. On
whoah.
apart from the fact that 1.1.3 had so many bugs and doesnt wo
John Dennis wrote:
Alan DeKok wrote:
Thanks. I've added a file "redhat/README" telling people to please go
read that document.
You're welcome. It's a good start and I hope it helps. FWIW we try to
make sure the thousands of software packages in our distributions are
well supported, it
Jos Vos wrote:
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 09:18:25AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
it would help immensely if Fedora, RHEL, CentOS et al actually
supplied up to date version of FreeRADIUS - ie at least 2.0.5
(if not 2.1.1 !) rather than the historic 1.1.x (or even 1.0.x!)
if such a version w
J Santos wrote:
Thank you Dennis,
It is a very, very useful document.
Checking both distros RHEL and CentOS there are only old packages available
(version 1.1.3) and only i386.
I have a rpm already built but it is not properly working.
Based on what you described in the doc I better insta
Alan DeKok wrote:
Thanks. I've added a file "redhat/README" telling people to please go
read that document.
You're welcome. It's a good start and I hope it helps. FWIW we try to
make sure the thousands of software packages in our distributions are
well supported, it can be a daunting ta
Jos Vos wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:47:08AM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
>
>> It should be easier for *new* installs to use 2.x. Otherwise, they
>> install the "latest" RHEL version, and then get told to upgrade.
>
> This is unrealistic. How should RH maintain a "sliding" base?
I didn'
Hi,
> The main "download" page on freeradius.org has a link to:
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/packageinfo?packageID=298
>
>
> Which has RPMs of recent versions. But who reads the web page?
your typical rh/fed/centos user would never visit the homepage
of the program/utility they
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:47:08AM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
> It should be easier for *new* installs to use 2.x. Otherwise, they
> install the "latest" RHEL version, and then get told to upgrade.
This is unrealistic. How should RH maintain a "sliding" base? And what
does "RHEL5" mean if the
Jos Vos wrote:
> RHEL (and thus CentOS) are conservative "enterprise" distros and thus
> do *not* include the newest ("bleeding edge") release of everything
> as soon as it comes out. They want to stay compatible through the
> 7 (!) years of support time. This is how it is and this is, in
> princ
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 10:28:40AM +0100, Alan DeKok wrote:
> John Dennis wrote:
> > So I've created a new FreeRADIUS wiki page with Red Hat specific
> > information:
> >
> > http://wiki.freeradius.org/Red_Hat_FAQ
>
> Thanks. I've added a file "redhat/README" telling people to please go
> re
On Tue, Dec 02, 2008 at 09:18:25AM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> it would help immensely if Fedora, RHEL, CentOS et al actually
> supplied up to date version of FreeRADIUS - ie at least 2.0.5
> (if not 2.1.1 !) rather than the historic 1.1.x (or even 1.0.x!)
>
> if such a version was availabl
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> it would help immensely if Fedora, RHEL, CentOS et al actually
> supplied up to date version of FreeRADIUS - ie at least 2.0.5
> (if not 2.1.1 !) rather than the historic 1.1.x (or even 1.0.x!)
The main "download" page on freeradius.org has a link to:
http://koji.fedo
John Dennis wrote:
> There has been a fair amount of confusion over how to get FreeRADIUS
> packages for Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS, how to perform a build if a
> pre-built package is not available, and how to do some basic maintenance
> tasks.
>
> So I've created a new FreeRADIUS wiki page with Red
Hi,
> There has been a fair amount of confusion over how to get FreeRADIUS
> packages for Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS, how to perform a build if a
> pre-built package is not available, and how to do some basic maintenance
> tasks.
it would help immensely if Fedora, RHEL, CentOS et al actually
s mailing list
> Subject: Building & Installing on Red Hat Systems (Was: Make
> error - Solved)
>
>
> There has been a fair amount of confusion over how to get FreeRADIUS
> packages for Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS, how to perform a build if a
> pre-built package is not
There has been a fair amount of confusion over how to get FreeRADIUS
packages for Fedora, RHEL, and CentOS, how to perform a build if a
pre-built package is not available, and how to do some basic maintenance
tasks.
So I've created a new FreeRADIUS wiki page with Red Hat specific
information:
19 matches
Mail list logo
