Thank you Uwe and Wes. I will give it a try over the weekend and will let
you know

On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 11:24 AM, Wes McKinney <[email protected]> wrote:

> I have found this can also be remedied by indicating to use the
> Homebrew OpenSSL when invoking cmake:
>
> e.g. (I think this is right)
>
> OPENSSL_ROOT_DIR=/usr/local/opt/openssl/ cmake $CMAKE_ARGS
>
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2017 at 9:30 AM, Uwe L. Korn <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello Rahul,
> >
> > it could be that Thrift in the first version was built against an old
> > OpenSSL version that does not support the newer TLS methods which are
> > required by Thrift 0.10. It is hard to guess what went wrong without
> > seeing the build log. If you are able to provide us with it, we can help
> > you understand the problem better.
> >
> > I guess you now have installed thrift using homebrew now?
> >
> > Uwe
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 8, 2017, at 10:28 PM, rahul challapalli wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I am using stable-1.3.x branch and I did a build using the below options
> >>
> >> cmake . -DPARQUET_BUILD_TESTS=Off -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release
> >> make
> >>
> >> However when using the libparquet.so, I get the below error
> >>
> >> Undefined symbols for architecture x86_64:
> >>   "_TLSv1_1_method", referenced from:
> >>
> >> apache::thrift::transport::SSLContext::SSLContext(apache:
> :thrift::transport::SSLProtocol
> >> const&) in TSSLSocket.cpp.o
> >>   "_TLSv1_2_method", referenced from:
> >>
> >> apache::thrift::transport::SSLContext::SSLContext(apache:
> :thrift::transport::SSLProtocol
> >> const&) in TSSLSocket.cpp.o
> >> ld: symbol(s) not found for architecture x86_64
> >>
> >> However after installing thrift manually. I ran with the below cmake
> >> options and everything worked.
> >>
> >> cmake . -DPARQUET_BUILD_TESTS=Off -DCMAKE_BUILD_TYPE=Release
> >> -DTHRIFT_INCLUDE_DIR=/usr/local/Cellar/thrift/0.10.0/include
> >> -DTHRIFT_STATIC_LIB=/usr/local/Cellar/thrift/0.10.0/lib/libthrift.a
> >> -DTHRIFT_COMPILER=/usr/local/bin/thrift
> >> make
> >>
> >> Any thoughts on why the first scenario failed?
> >>
> >> - Rahul
>

Reply via email to