Thanks for your responses Steve, Scott. Steve Bayliss:
We used dbxml 2.5.13 (with Fedora Commons 3.3). While at the end of the install it looked OK (and Fedora seemed to run OK), one of our sysadmins found problems when trying to prepare an install package for it: [...] > dbxml-2.5.x is a reach too far for a RHEL 5 system. Although the oracle > configure and build scripts do not abort there are some serious errors > present in the output. The xerces-c 3.x build has link errors against > "incompatible" versions of libc, libpthread, libm (the core c and math > libraries) among a farily long list of libraries. > > The dbxmnl 2.5 build proper flags the version of autoconf and m4 as > incompatible. [...] He reports dbxml 2.5.16 has similar problems when building Xerces-C, hence my wondering if there's any chance it's OK to do without Xerces-C. On Fri, Oct 1, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Scott Hammel <sc...@clemson.edu> wrote: > I can send you the recipe I recorded for building dbxml on CentOS, though, > if you want it .... That would be great. > I got dbxml to build on CentOS 5.5, but set that piece of the project I am > doing aside for a bit as I believe I'll have to rethink object-specific > policies with FeSL, so don't know how well it all works on a RHEL-based > distribution. I would also be interested in hearing about this, perhaps offline or on another thread, as that's something we're considering. Thanks again, Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Fedora-commons-users mailing list Fedora-commons-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fedora-commons-users
