Hi Fajar,
OK sounds familiar to me ;-)
OK let me try your proposal and install libssl1.0-dev and see if I can get
bind-9.11.0-P2 to build.
Many thanks,
Wolfgang
> On 27 Jan 2017, at 14:40PM, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>
> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Wolfgang Riedel
> Just wonder if there is some agreed guidance on what steps I SHOULD take =
> to get bind-9.11.0-P2 successfully build on Debian 9.0?
>
>
> /usr/bin/ld: //lib64/libcrypto.a(a_object.o):
> relocation R_X86_64_PC32 against symbol `ASN1_OBJECT_free'
> can not be used when making a shared object;
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:20 PM, Wolfgang Riedel wrote:
> Just wonder if there is some agreed guidance on what steps I SHOULD take
> to get bind-9.11.0-P2 successfully build on Debian 9.0?
>
>
The generic recommendation on debian would probably be 'use whatever the
distro comes
Hi Folks,
many thanks for the candidate feedback and the deep dive on what I should not
have done ;-)
Not a big deal as it’s just a VM and I can easily start from scratch but I am
burning a lot of time trying instead of learning.
Just wonder if there is some agreed guidance on what steps I
Am 26.01.2017 um 19:50 schrieb Dennis Clarke:
On 01/26/2017 06:39 PM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 1/26/17 1:31 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
The POSIX and XPG4 approach [is a great idea]
(My text in brackets)
Said no one, ever.
That wasn't the point however. The point is that the sources do
exist
Am 26.01.2017 um 19:55 schrieb Dennis Clarke:
On 01/26/2017 06:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
libraries got overwritten by the package manager
Impossible.
If the user built or the vendor supplied software follows the rules
of separation along with the RPATH and RUNPATH data inside the ELF
On 1/26/17 1:50 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> On 01/26/2017 06:39 PM, Alan Clegg wrote:
>> On 1/26/17 1:31 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>> The POSIX and XPG4 approach [is a great idea]
>>
>> (My text in brackets)
>>
>> Said no one, ever.
>
>Clearly I just said it ... and have before ... as have
On 01/26/2017 06:48 PM, Reindl Harald wrote:
librarie sgot overwritten by the package manager
Impossible.
If the user built or the vendor supplied software follows the rules
of separation along with the RPATH and RUNPATH data inside the ELF
dynamic sections then what you say is
On 01/26/2017 06:39 PM, Alan Clegg wrote:
On 1/26/17 1:31 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
The POSIX and XPG4 approach [is a great idea]
(My text in brackets)
Said no one, ever.
Clearly I just said it ... and have before ... as have others for
about twenty years or at least since 1999.
Am 26.01.2017 um 19:31 schrieb Dennis Clarke:
1) OpenSSL dependency dance
I removed OpenSSL 1.1 and compiled OpenSSL 1.0.2e from source
You'll probably have better luck installing Debian's libssl1.0-dev and
related packages, rather than installing it yourself. Plain libssl-dev in
Stretch is
On 1/26/17 1:31 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> The POSIX and XPG4 approach [is a great idea]
(My text in brackets)
Said no one, ever.
AlanC
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
Please visit
1) OpenSSL dependency dance
I removed OpenSSL 1.1 and compiled OpenSSL 1.0.2e from source
You'll probably have better luck installing Debian's libssl1.0-dev and
related packages, rather than installing it yourself. Plain libssl-dev in
Stretch is OpenSSL 1.1.
If you install stuff yourself
Am 26.01.2017 um 18:59 schrieb Dennis Clarke:
OpenSSL 1.1 is currently not supported because they made
backwards-incompatible API changes ...
Is this issue documented somewhere?
it was discussed multiple times here
https://www.google.com/search?q=bind+openssl+1.1
when you follow several
OpenSSL 1.1 is currently not supported because they made
> backwards-incompatible API changes ...
Is this issue documented somewhere ?
Dennis Clarke
___
Please visit https://lists.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/bind-users to unsubscribe
from this
Am 26.01.2017 um 16:30 schrieb Wolfgang Riedel:
I agree and also didn’t like it but I had been told that OpenSSL 1.1 is currently
not supported because they made backwards-incompatible API changes and this is the
default on Debian stretch. That’s the reason why I compiled from source to get
Hi Tony,
I agree and also didn’t like it but I had been told that OpenSSL 1.1 is
currently not supported because they made backwards-incompatible API changes
and this is the default on Debian stretch. That’s the reason why I compiled
from source to get to 1.0 < 1.1
Wolfgang
> On 26 Jan 2017,
Wolfgang Riedel wrote:
>
> Just wonder if someone had success compiling bind-9.11.0-P2 on Debian 9.0
> (stretch)?
I haven't tried it myself.
> 1) OpenSSL dependency dance
>
> I removed OpenSSL 1.1 and compiled OpenSSL 1.0.2e from source
You'll probably have better luck
17 matches
Mail list logo