Re: [Leaf-devel] Admin script help
On Sun, 2002-04-14 at 11:40, guitarlynn wrote: > On Sunday 14 April 2002 11:53, Mike Noyes wrote: > > Jeff, > > I modified your script, and added Lynn's awk line. I hope I didn't > > muck it up to bad. > > Looks OK to me if the output is correct. Lynn, It appears to be. All of the packages I've run it on generated acceptable output. The awk line complains when there is no .version file, but that's ok. > > Everyone, > > Is there a reason that our packages don't contain the program name in > > the version file? > > The majority of packages seem to work that way I imagine that > they were done this way since you should already know the > 'basename' to check the version #. > > The package listing you're making would be the first time that we've > had a good reason for implicitly putting the packagename in the > version file. What I want is the program name, not the package name. As you correctly stated above, the package name is already known. > Adding: echo 'basename $1' should give the packagename > if you want that in the output as well. Thanks. :-) > > I've been looking at the ldd output, and I'm having a hard time > > figuring out how to determine glibc versions from its output. The > > best I've come up with is to look for the presence of libm.so.6. Is > > that correct? > > libc.so.6 was used as far back as libc-2.0.x from what I could find. > I couldn't locate if it was actually in libc-2.0.x or backported from > later release of libc for compatibility. Anyone that has worked > making any libc-2.1+ packages probably knows. So, how do I determine the glibc version? Do I have to use the hex number, and find a reference that will list the various versions? Any help is appreciated. -- Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] Admin script help
On Sunday 14 April 2002 11:53, Mike Noyes wrote: > Jeff & Lynn, > Thanks for the help. :-) > > Jeff, > I modified your script, and added Lynn's awk line. I hope I didn't > muck it up to bad. Looks OK to me if the output is correct. > Everyone, > Is there a reason that our packages don't contain the program name in > the version file? The majority of packages seem to work that way I imagine that they were done this way since you should already know the 'basename' to check the version #. The package listing you're making would be the first time that we've had a good reason for implicitly putting the packagename in the version file. Adding: echo 'basename $1' should give the packagename if you want that in the output as well. > I've been looking at the ldd output, and I'm having a hard time > figuring out how to determine glibc versions from its output. The > best I've come up with is to look for the presence of libm.so.6. Is > that correct? libc.so.6 was used as far back as libc-2.0.x from what I could find. I couldn't locate if it was actually in libc-2.0.x or backported from later release of libc for compatibility. Anyone that has worked making any libc-2.1+ packages probably knows. -- ~Lynn Avants aka Guitarlynn guitarlynn at users.sourceforge.net http://leaf.sourceforge.net If linux isn't the answer, you've probably got the wrong question! ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] Package description file proposal
Everyone, I sent the prior message prematurely. On Sun, 2002-04-14 at 11:20, Mike Noyes wrote: > I propose the following changes: use program name instead of package > name, use ISO 8601 date format, use version format from pkg.version, add > glibc version, remove "Keywords", "Release", and "Group". add kernel version if applicable > Name: Ultimate Packer for eXecutables > Version: 1.20-1 > Packager: David Douthitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Packaged: 2001-07-18 > glibc: 2.1.3 kernel: N/A > Description: UPX is a free, portable, extendable, high-performance > executable packer for several different executable formats. It > achieves an excellent compression ratio and offers very fast > decompression. Your executables suffer no memory overhead or other > drawbacks. > URL: http://upx.sourceforge.net/ > License: GPL2 -- Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
[Leaf-devel] Package description file proposal
Everyone, David outlines a package description file in his "Developing for LRP" guide. The format follows. /var/lib/lrpkg/pkg.desc Name: upx Version: 1.20 Release: 1 Packager: David Douthitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Packaged: Wed Jul 18 09:40:25 CDT 2001 Keywords: compressor compress Description: Use UPX to compress executables and kernels! URL: http://upx.sourceforge.net/ License: GPL2 Group: Utilities/Compression I propose the following changes: use program name instead of package name, use ISO 8601 date format, use version format from pkg.version, add glibc version, remove "Keywords", "Release", and "Group". Name: Ultimate Packer for eXecutables Version: 1.20-1 Packager: David Douthitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Packaged: 2001-07-18 glibc: 2.1.3 Description: UPX is a free, portable, extendable, high-performance executable packer for several different executable formats. It achieves an excellent compression ratio and offers very fast decompression. Your executables suffer no memory overhead or other drawbacks. URL: http://upx.sourceforge.net/ License: GPL2 -- Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/ http://leaf-project.org/ ___ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
Re: [Leaf-devel] Admin script help
On Sat, 2002-04-13 at 12:36, Jeff Newmiller wrote:
> perhaps
>
> #!/bin/sh
> TMPDIR=/tmp/lrpdd
> ORIGDIR=`pwd`
>
> if [ "" == "$1" ]; then
> echo "usage : lrpldd lrpfilename"
> elif [ -r "$1" ]; then
> mkdir $TMPDIR
> cd $TMPDIR
> tar xzf $1
> find . -type f -exec ldd \{} \; 2>/dev/null \
> | grep -v ':$' | sort | uniq
> cd $ORIGDIR
> rm -R $TMPDIR
> else
> echo "lrpldd : \"$1\" not found"
> fi
>
> would be more effective?
Jeff & Lynn,
Thanks for the help. :-)
Jeff,
I modified your script, and added Lynn's awk line. I hope I didn't muck
it up to bad.
#! /bin/bash
TMPDIR=temp
ORIGDIR=`pwd`
if [ "" == "$1" ]; then
echo "usage : ./ldd-ver.sh lrpfilename"
elif [ -r "$1" ]; then
mkdir $TMPDIR
cp "$1" $TMPDIR
cd $TMPDIR
tar xzf `basename $1`
find . -type f -exec ldd \{} \; 2>/dev/null \
| grep -v ':$' | sort | uniq
awk '{print $1}' var/lib/lrpkg/`basename $1 .lrp`.version
cd $ORIGDIR
rm -rf $TMPDIR
else
echo "lrpldd : \"$1\" not found"
fi
Everyone,
Is there a reason that our packages don't contain the program name in
the version file?
I've been looking at the ldd output, and I'm having a hard time figuring
out how to determine glibc versions from its output. The best I've come
up with is to look for the presence of libm.so.6. Is that correct?
Example of glibc 2.0 output:
$ ./ldd-ver.sh packages/snort.lrp
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40041000)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000)
/lib/libNoVersion.so.1 => /lib/libNoVersion.so.1 (0x40017000)
libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x4002a000)
not a dynamic executable
1.5-1
Example of glibc 2.1 output:
$ ./ldd-ver.sh packages/squid-2.lrp
libcrypt.so.1 => /lib/libcrypt.so.1 (0x40028000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40028000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40053000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x40073000)
libc.so.6 => /lib/libc.so.6 (0x400a)
/lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x4000)
/lib/libNoVersion.so.1 => /lib/libNoVersion.so.1 (0x40017000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x40028000)
libm.so.6 => /lib/libm.so.6 (0x40055000)
libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x4003c000)
libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x4005c000)
libnsl.so.1 => /lib/libnsl.so.1 (0x40089000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x4002a000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x4004a000)
libresolv.so.2 => /lib/libresolv.so.2 (0x40077000)
not a dynamic executable
2.4.STABLE4
--
Mike Noyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://sourceforge.net/users/mhnoyes/
http://leaf-project.org/
___
Leaf-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
