Disregard that last email. Coffee is good, not re-running ./configure after
installing deps is bad. Following up shortly with more pertinent info.
Thank you.

On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 3:58 PM Ryan Blenis <ryan.ble...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Janos,
>
> Thanks for the response, in trying to do this (I cloned the repo,
> ./configure --localstatedir=/var --with-database=mariadb , and ran make)
> and got this:
>
> Making all in src
> make[1]: Entering directory '/tmp/piler/src/piler/src'
> gcc -std=c99 -O2 -fPIC -Wall -Wextra -Wimplicit-fallthrough=2
> -Wuninitialized -Wno-format-truncation -g  -I. -I..  -I/usr/include/mariadb
> -I/usr/include/mariadb/mysql -D_GNU_SOURCE -DHAVE_TRE -DNEED_MYSQL -o
> pilerexport pilerexport.c -lpiler -lz -lm -ldl -lcrypto -lssl -ltre
> -L/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ -lmariadb -L.
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/ccU39C8h.o: in function `write_to_zip_file':
> /tmp/piler/src/piler/src/pilerexport.c:329: undefined reference to
> `zip_open'
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/piler/src/piler/src/pilerexport.c:335: undefined
> reference to `zip_source_file'
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/piler/src/piler/src/pilerexport.c:336: undefined
> reference to `zip_file_add'
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/piler/src/piler/src/pilerexport.c:342: undefined
> reference to `zip_close'
> /usr/bin/ld: /tmp/piler/src/piler/src/pilerexport.c:339: undefined
> reference to `zip_strerror'
> collect2: error: ld returned 1 exit status
> make[1]: *** [Makefile:63: pilerexport] Error 1
> make[1]: Leaving directory '/tmp/piler/src/piler/src'
> make: *** [Makefile:41: all-recursive] Error 1
>
> (Note that I originally got a zip.h not found error, which I ran apt
> install libzip-dev. Ubuntu 20.04.2 LTS
>
> I can't seem to get past this point to recompile.
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 2:50 PM <s...@acts.hu> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hello Ryan,
>>
>> please apply this patch to pilerexport.c, and recompile it.
>>
>> https://bitbucket.org/jsuto/piler/commits/e6607b0bf1d44562bcf2a08e3bfed94181b7b95d
>>
>> It syslogs the sphinx query. Then try the following. Enter the search
>> query
>> on the gui, and record the sphinx query syslogged. Then re-run the
>> pilerexport command, and record the new sphinx query, and compare it
>> with the previous value.
>>
>> Verify that even the single-quotes and double quotes are the same in
>> both queries.
>>
>> Janos SUTO
>>
>>
>> On 2021-04-07 18:18, Ryan Blenis wrote:
>> > Hi Janos,
>> >
>> > I have to export potentially a ton of emails and was looking to use
>> > pilerexport versus multiple batches of GUI searches. I saw the -w flag
>> > and thought "great, I can use this" but it doesn't seem to respond
>> > appropriately for my test case. I have 2 emails that match the
>> > following (generalized terms used vs actual), limiting with -m 3 for
>> > testing purposes (I should only get 2 back).
>> >
>> > pilerexport -a 2010.10.01 -b 2021.04.06 -r "j...@domain.com" -m 3 -w
>> > 'MATCH('"'"'searchterm NEAR/25 (MNF|(search term)|term|(test search
>> > term)|termin*)'"'"')'
>> >
>> > Now, that match is just the bash string escaped version of:
>> > MATCH('searchterm NEAR/25 (MNF|(search term)|term|(test search
>> > term)|termin*)')
>> > (That's just a fancy sphinx query for "searchterm" within 25 words of
>> > MNF OR "search term" OR "term" OR "test search term" or "termin*" for
>> > those unfamiliar with sphinx.)
>> >
>> > Which, when overloading the Advanced Search for the "body" field in
>> > the GUI with:
>> > searchterm NEAR/25 (MNF|(search term)|term|(test search term)|termin*)
>> >
>> > Seems to work just fine and as expected, however, in pilerexport with
>> > the aforementioned command I get tons of unrelated emails (not even
>> > scoped to the appropriate j...@domain.com recipient). Is using a MATCH
>> > term like this with -w possible, or am I looking to do too much here?
>> >
>> > Note that I saw you added the -o parameter in the source so I may be a
>> > version or 2 back (utility doesn't seem to have a -v or --version
>> > output), and my version doesn't appear to have that, so I don't really
>> > have any great diagnostic/output information to go off of other than
>> > the above description.
>> >
>> > Thank you in advance as always for any insight you can give!
>>
>

Reply via email to