I'm cc'ing one of my Suse contacts on this thread... On Mon, 2014-05-05 at 23:07 -0400, CDR wrote: > I was under the impression that the LXC group could make this compile > under every major distribution.
Strictly speaking, there is no "LXC group". There are a few core individuals (not sure if I qualify there or not - probably not) and a lot of contributors. I'm also a member of the Samba Team which has a formal membership and list but that's not the case here. We all come from different walks of life and different passions. I'm sure Serge and Stephane don't even have all distros running as hosts in their labs, I certainly don't. They work for Ubuntu and are apt and Debian oriented (I won't hold that against them). Dwight works for Oracle and there are a number of RedHat contributors who are yum and rpm oriented. I'm fanatical about getting things to work cross distro and a Fedora fanatic but I'm retired and I contribute my time to the topics I chose and I feel passionate about. Who's here speaking for the Suse, zypper crowd? Not I. I do my best but I'm no maven on their platform. Where are they? They have to contribute and be a part of the community. I'm also not sure what your definition of "major" distribution is but I'm sure it's not congruent with mine or Serge's or Stephane's. Slackware? Mandivia? NST? Knoppix? I would personally rank those four above Apline, Alt or Arch and possibly some even above Suse, but there are plenty on this list who would be in my face in a heart beat to disagree. <Shurg> This is a best effort on the part of most of us. And that often requires some cooperation from some of the reporters who we understand are analyzing situations for which they are unfamiliar or unqualified to analyze. That's a given. That's why we ask detailed questions and expect details answers. Too often, we're given answers that are non-answers or flat out bullshit or our explanations and instructions are ignored or contradicted. And arguing with us is certainly less than cooperative and even less likely to elicit further assistance from us. We have better things to do. My experience is more matrix than many of the others. Doesn't mean I have every version of Suse running in my lab. I don't have any version of Suse running on a host in my lab, OpenSuse or SEL. Where are the Suse people? If they want it supported on their platform, their people have to participate. I'm not paid to support Suse. Where are they? If they want it on SEL, it would be nice if they would provide us a copy to develop and test on. VMWare always provided copies and licenses to the Samba Team. Even M$ provided developer licenses to the Samba Team once they were stung by the OpenSource requirements. You can't develop in a vacuum. I do enough on Suse to just get by. Why have they not chimed in on this very thread with Suse Enterprise in the very subject. That's telling in and of itself if they don't care. If I rag on Ubuntu or RHEL (or Oracle - Hi Dwight!), they'll be crawling out of the woodwork on me like roaches. > Is there any way somebody from the LXC group can research this with > the Suse guys? They surely > will talk to you people, but not to a customer, unless I pay support fees. > I imagine I need to install a newer autconf or automake I have talked (E-Mail) to the to Suse people. They need to participate here like all the other distros that want to be supported. It's a participatory sport, not a spectator sport. Where are they? > rpm -qa | grep auto > automake-1.10.1-4.131.9.1 > autoconf-2.63-1.158 > Can anybody from the developer's group confirm these versions? Only the Suse people can confirm those versions on Suse platforms. Only they can tell you why it's failing. I can be of no further support on Suse platforms for you. > Yours > Philip Regards, Mike > On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:00 PM, Michael H. Warfield <[email protected]> > wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-05-05 at 22:23 -0400, CDR wrote: > >> I know I am missing something, but I cannot figure it out. > >> It does compile in Fedora 20 > > > > You're gonna have to talk to the Suse guys on that one. I've got some > > of their E-Mail addreses. I know the original author of the OpenSuse > > template is no longer involved but I know of one or two others who have > > taken his place and may be able to help. > > > > Regards, > > Mike > > > >> git clone https://github.com/lxc/lxc.git > >> cd lxc > >> ./autogen.sh > >> + test -d autom4te.cache > >> + rm -rf autom4te.cache > >> + aclocal -I config > >> configure.ac:205: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:219: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:234: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:252: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:269: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:304: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:315: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> configure.ac:377: warning: macro `AM_COND_IF' not found in library > >> + autoheader > >> + autoconf > >> configure.ac:18: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_SUBST > >> If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow. > >> See the Autoconf documentation. > >> configure.ac:36: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_CHECKING > >> configure.ac:72: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_RESULT > >> configure.ac:118: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_ERROR > >> configure.ac:199: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_CHECK_LIB > >> configure.ac:205: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_COND_IF > >> configure.ac:206: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_CHECK_HEADER > >> configure.ac:235: error: possibly undefined macro: PKG_CHECK_MODULES > >> configure.ac:305: error: possibly undefined macro: AM_PATH_PYTHON > >> configure.ac:307: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_DEFINE_UNQUOTED > >> configure.ac:328: error: possibly undefined macro: PKG_CHECK_VAR > >> + exit 1 > >> _______________________________________________ > >> lxc-users mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users > > > > -- > > Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 978-7061 | [email protected] > > /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ > > NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of > > all > > PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it! > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > lxc-users mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users > _______________________________________________ > lxc-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users -- Michael H. Warfield (AI4NB) | (770) 978-7061 | [email protected] /\/\|=mhw=|\/\/ | (678) 463-0932 | http://www.wittsend.com/mhw/ NIC whois: MHW9 | An optimist believes we live in the best of all PGP Key: 0x674627FF | possible worlds. A pessimist is sure of it!
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ lxc-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxcontainers.org/listinfo/lxc-users
