Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:59:25 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: owl-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: make buildworld troubles

On Thu, Nov 21, 2002 at 05:23:42PM +0300, Oleg Lukashin wrote:
> * Solar Designer (solar@...nwall.com) wrote:
> 
> > Then the files under it aren't or the kernel hasn't been configured.
> > In another message you said you didn't build it, but did you configure
> > it?  The minimum that needs to be done is a "make menuconfig", you may
> > leave everything at defaults, but you do need to run it and save the
> > configuration.
> 
> Ohh, I see. so, path to kernel sources should be /usr/src/linux, yes ? 

Right.

> > It is recommended that you do kernel configuration and builds as user
> > "sources", too.
> 
> why then documentation says it should be done from "build" user ?

It doesn't.  It says that "make buildworld" should be done as "build".
Kernels are different.

Perhaps we should simplify this.

[BIND]
> > There're several alternatives to choose from:
> > 
> > 1. Pick and use binary packages from Red Hat Linux 6.2 updates.  Or
> > rebuild them from SRPMs, but it doesn't make much of a difference.
> > This is the easiest.
> 
> is there is any difference between RedHat's and Owl's
> directory structure in case using packets such as bind or apache for example?

There're differences, but we try to provide compatibility for certain
versions of Red Hat Linux.  For Owl 1.0, that's RHL 6.x.  So you can
install packages intended for RHL 6.x on Owl 1.0.

> > 2. Use BIND 4.9.x-OW, setting up its chroot jail manually (there's an
> > explanation of how this may be done).
> 
> You mean patch or tarball ? if tar, where it can be found ?

Patch.  Why, does it make a difference?  Applying the patch is just
one command.

-- 
/sd

Hosted by DataForce ISP - Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux