On 7/5/07, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Andrew,
Pls see my comments/questions below...
--- Andrew Beekhof <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/4/07, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Just as an FYI, for anyone else who is interested... I found using the
Fedora
> > packages available here (v 2.1.0),
> > http://software.opensuse.org/download/server:/ha-clustering/
> > to be problematic getting them installed on RHEL 4. The reason being that
they
> have
> > dependencies that are not easily resolved under RHEL 4.
>
> more information?
> i based the dependancies on the ones used by RH to build their
> heartbeat packages but I'm all ears if you think i've made a
> mistake...
>
I'm not saying you necessarily made a mistake. I just think that I can't
expect the
Fedora RPMs to smoothly install under RHEL. This seems to be due to the package
differences between the two release streams (Fedora/RHEL). For instance,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~/2.1.0 > rpm --test -ivh heartbeat-pils-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64.rpm
warning: heartbeat-pils-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA signature: NOKEY, key ID
6b9d6523
error: Failed dependencies:
rtld(GNU_HASH) is needed by heartbeat-pils-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64
rtld doesn't seem available for this RHEL release.
cant say i've heard of it, though searching seems to indicate it's
part of glibc or glibc-core...
http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/3/srodzaj/1/search/rtld(GNU_HASH)
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/mnt/AS4u5-x86_64/RedHat/RPMS > rpm --test -ivh
~/fed5/heartbeat-stonith-2.1.0.40.1.x86_64.rpm
warning: /home/dsoble/fed5/heartbeat-stonith-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64.rpm: V3 DSA
signature: Ny ID 6b9d6523
error: Failed dependencies:
libcrypto.so.6()(64bit) is needed by heartbeat-stonith-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64
libnetsnmp.so.10()(64bit) is needed by
heartbeat-stonith-2.1.0-40.1.x86_64
These lib versions, libcrypto.so.6 and libnetsnmp.so.10 are newer than what
exists
on RHEL4, and I can't find appropriate packages that would provide these newer
libraries.
(interesting link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Hat_Enterprise_Linux#Relationship_to_free_or_community_versions
)
Ok, that link explains a lot... no wonder you're having problems.
Older Fedora versions aren't possible (I asked) as the decision is not
to support versions that have been declared End-of-Life by the vendor.
See: http://lists.opensuse.org/opensuse-buildservice/2007-05/msg00104.html
Will there be any plans to possibly release RPMs for RHEL in the future???
Unlikely, at least in the short-term (or political reasons as you can
probably imagine)
But as long as the FC version it is based is supported, you'll be able
to use those.
> > Instead, I had more success using the Centos packages here (v 2.0.8):
> > http://dev.centos.org/centos/4/testing/x86_64/RPMS/
> >
> > The rpm install order went like this:
> > heartbeat-pils
> > libidn
> > curl
> > heartbeat-stonith
> > lm_sensors
> > heartbeat
> >
> > This leaves me with a 2.0.8 installation, which might be okay, however, I'm
> under
> > the impression that using the later 2.1.0 version would be more stable(?)
To
> other
> > HB users feel that 2.1.0 is more stable???
>
> don't use 2.0.8 if you have any choice in the matter
> please read the various emails on the subject
>
Understood. I downloaded the latest stable source as you suggested, called:
Heartbeat-Dev-70067cb78a6e.tar.bz2
and after installing all the required build packages, I finally got "ConfigureMe
configure" to work, but I'm still running into some problems during "make".
Will
continue to work on resolving those issues...
more info?
Also, it would be nice to have the GUI as an optional installation component,
but
that's just my opinion. In our environment, we almost always use servers
without
X11 or graphics at all - just plain old simply, nice, fast, clean command-line
;-)
<short rant re: GUI>
I understand the (need) desire for graphics on workstations or PCs, but
generally, I
think it's just unnecessary overhead on server machines, or server admin tools
(ie.
harder [or impossible] to script actions, usually has fewer features than the
command-line, (unless the GUI was developed first), more tricky for remote
management (ie. can't just use simple ssh), more painful over slow links, etc,
etc..)
</rant over>
no argument here... its been many moons since i used the gui
but then again i roll my own packages and disable the gui....
> > Also, is the source for 2.1.0 available? I was only able to find the
source for
> > 2.0.8 on the HA website.
>
> as has been explained many times here on the list, the sources for any
> version are available from:
> http://hg.linux-ha.org/dev/archive/<version>.tar.bz2
> eg.
> http://hg.linux-ha.org/dev/archive/STABLE-2.1.0.tar.bz2
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-HA mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
> See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
>
Thanks again for your assistance!
____________________________________________________________________________________
Park yourself in front of a world of choices in alternative vehicles. Visit the
Yahoo! Auto Green Center.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center/
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
_______________________________________________
Linux-HA mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linux-ha.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-ha
See also: http://linux-ha.org/ReportingProblems
