Subject: FreeBSD - Building 1.5pre3...

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 15:17:52 +0100

Hi!

Does anybody have any tips on building 1.5pre* under FreeBSD 4.2?

I have these packages installed:

autoconf-2.13      
automake-1.4       
gettext-0.10.35    
gmake-3.79.1       
libtool-1.3.4_2    
m4-1.4             
makedepend-2000.12.28

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

When I run make, I get the following error:

[vulcan:~/netatalk] jason# make
make  all-recursive
Making all in libatalk
Making all in adouble
"Makefile", line 231: Need an operator
make: fatal errors encountered -- cannot continue
*** Error code 1

Stop in /root/netatalk/libatalk.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /root/netatalk.
*** Error code 1

Stop in /root/netatalk.
[vulcan:~/netatalk] jason#

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Line 231 reads:

-include $(DEP_FILES)

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

This somehow doesn't seem right. Am I missing other prerequisites? Maybe
gawk instead of awk? I can't think of anything else related to Makefile
munging.

Thanks,
Jason.

---

From: Sebastian Rittau <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2001 20:48:56 +0100

> I have these packages installed:
[...]
> gmake-3.79.1       
[...]
[...]
> Stop in /root/netatalk/libatalk.
[...]

This doesn't look like output from gmake. This may be the problem.

 - Sebastian

---

From: Christoph Sold <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 21:37:58 +0100

Did you use gmake? Remember, BSD make is pretty different from GNU make.

HTH
-Christoph Sold

-- 
Freundliche Grüße aus Waiblingen

Christoph Sold
--
Systemadministrator, i-clue GmbH, Endersbacher Str. 57, 71334 Waiblingen
Fon: (0 71 51) 9 59 01-12, Fax: (0 71 51) 9 59 01-55, Mail: [email-masked]

---

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2001 22:57:10 +0100

Thanks guys!

Looks like I was a silly boy. I should have been using 'gmake' instead of
'make'. Why it didn't register I don't know! The expression "Can't see the
wood for the trees" springs to mind.

Anyway, the compile is going a bit better now. It's failing due to a missing
crypt.h. I'm not sure where to get this header file. Any ideas? There are
various cryptography packages and I don't want to install them willy nilly
until I get what I need.

I have the DES libs installed:

lrwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel       13 Feb  1 18:29 /usr/lib/libcrypt.a ->
libdescrypt.a
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel       14 Feb  1 18:29 /usr/lib/libcrypt.so ->
libdescrypt.so
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel       16 Feb  1 18:29 /usr/lib/libcrypt.so.2 ->
libdescrypt.so.2
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel       15 Feb  1 18:29 /usr/lib/libcrypt_p.a ->
libdescrypt_p.a
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel  1287976 Dec  2 17:39 /usr/lib/libcrypto.a
lrwxrwxrwx  1 root  wheel       14 Feb  1 18:29 /usr/lib/libcrypto.so ->
libcrypto.so.1
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel   790036 Dec  2 17:39 /usr/lib/libcrypto.so.1
-r--r--r--  1 root  wheel  1376598 Dec  2 17:39 /usr/lib/libcrypto_p.a

I'm not sure what to do. In Debian Linux, it was just a case of installing
the dev pkg. I'm still trying to find my way around xBSDland.

Thanks,
Jason.

---

From: Hauke Fath <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 10:03:50 +0100

>wood for the trees" springs to mind.

No. Looks like those who did the transition to autoconf are the silly boys 
- because they built in needless dependencies on GNU make.

The majority of configure scripts out there does _not_ depend on GNU make 
but instead works with a reasonable subset of make commands that is 
supported by a wide variety of make tools out there.

Whoever is responsible for this gratuitous change: Please remove any gmake 
dependencies. Netatalk has long been a cross-platform application that 
could be built without having half a GNU-Linux distribution around. Let's 
keep it that way.

My 0.02 EUR,

         hauke

--
Hauke Fath                        Tangro Software Components GmbH
                                         D-69115 Heidelberg
[email-masked]                       Ruf +49-6221-13336-0, Fax -21

---

From: jeff <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 09:40:35 -0500

> could be built without having half a GNU-Linux distribution around. Let's

It was a tradeoff. We don't have to worry about maintaining the Makefile
system to pass huge numbers of parameters from one place to another, or
editing Makefiles to add shadow password support, or anything. In
exchange for that, you need a few GNU utilities.

The best cross-platform source code packages I have seen so far use GNU
autoconf (like samba, if I'm not mistaken). The old makefile system also
generated more netatalk-admin questions about its use than almost
anything else in the 1.4b2+asunx.x.x series.

I don't think the transition to GNU autoconf was silly. It was a way to
make things a little bit more cross-platform and easier to maintain.
Tru64 support was added recently with little or no trouble, as an
example of this.

If we need to keep the symbolic links, etc, out of the distribution,
I'll make sure that there aren't any there when I tar it up for
distribution the next time.

jeff

---

From: Hauke Fath <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2001 16:43:28 +0100

>make things a little bit more cross-platform and easier to maintain.

Well, there are two things to keep apart: The use of autoconf, and 
setting up the whole configuration so that GNU make must be used.

For 1) I am not up to speed wrt the current netatalk sources, but I 
recall that the build on NetBSD/mac68k broke early on a while back, 
and I did not get anywhere with the autoconf related pieces. A query 
for autoconf pointers/tutorials/whatever information to the 
developers' list dropped to the floor, unanswered.

For 2) please correct me if I am wrong, but autoconf does _not_ 
enforce the use of GNU make. There are a lot of autoconf based 
packages out there that do not rely on GNU make extensions to 
standard make features. A notable exception is gcc, but netatalk does 
not have its complexity.

The emphasis of my mail lay on 2).

	hauke

-- 
Hauke Fath                        tangro software components GmbH
                                         D-69115 Heidelberg
[email-masked]                       Ruf +49-6221-13336-0, Fax -21

---

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 20:46:47 +0100

Hi list!

I have managed to get the software compiled and running. I can see the
server in the chooser. I am now getting the following error message when I
select the server:

"The User Authentication Method required by this server can't be found.
Please check the AppleShare folder in the Extensions folder and try again."

I assume this has something to do with the DES encryption. I assume also
that plain text passwords are disabled. Is there any way of adding the DES
capability to the Mac? Or, failing that, just re-enable plain text passwords
in the compile?

Do any fellow FreeBSDers think it would be worth making a package of this
version? Too cutting edge?

Many thanks,
Jason.

---

From: Jason Quigley <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 21:04:23 +0100

Hate to reply to my own posts - it means I leapt before looking!

Anyway, I fixed the problem. I just forgot a couple of sym links.

My question about the BSD package still stands, though.

Cheers,
Jason.

---

From: jeff <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 02 Mar 2001 15:07:40 -0500

> capability to the Mac? Or, failing that, just re-enable plain text passwords

Upgrade to the newest AppleShare Client that Mac recommends. DHX does
not work on older versions of AppleShare Client.

jeff