I've built on Fedora and the unreleased RHEL-7
On RHEL-7 I built on the following architectures:
ppc, s390, x86_64, ppc64, i686, s390x
All of those built successfully but when I run one of our analysis tools
it reports some problems, mostly in the area of multilib (multilib is
where you can have
John Dennis wrote:
> I'm also contemplating splitting the doc into it's own subpackage, the
> doc is 4.6MB, no reason to install that much data on minimal install
> production servers.
Yeah. Most of the docs are RFCs. There's no point in installing
those on minimal servers.
If you update th
On 07/23/2013 05:18 AM, stefan.pae...@diamond.ac.uk wrote:
> Thanks, John.
>
> I'll use that SPEC as base for CentOS 6.x packages :-)
I'm will be making some tweaks to the spec file over the near term. For
instance I just realized I make a mistake with the release field in the
N-V-R, the package
Hi,
>> # mv raddb raddb-noinst
>> # mkdir raddb
>> # touch raddb/all.mk
>> # make install
>
> that's easy enough, thanks!
Except that it doesn't suffice :-/
INSTALL rlm_utf8.la
INSTALL rlm_always.la
INSTALL rlm_logintime.la
INSTALL rlm_attr_filter.la
INSTALL rlm_soh.la
make: *** No rule to make
s.freeradius.org] On Behalf Of
> John Dennis
> Sent: 23 July 2013 00:42
> To: FreeRadius users mailing list
> Subject: Re: [ANN] Version 3.0.0-rc0
>
> FYI I've packaged this for Fedora and built it for rawhide (rawhide is
> current development which spawns the next Fedo
FYI I've packaged this for Fedora and built it for rawhide (rawhide is
current development which spawns the next Fedora release).
You can download the rawhide packages and/or the SRPM from the Koji build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=436791
You probably will not be able t
John Dennis wrote:
> Why is udpfromto disabled by default?
It didn't work in some situations. But that was a while ago.
> I thought udpfromto was necessary
> for correct operation in some configurations and benign otherwise.
I'd say "useful", not "necessary". But largely, yes.
> I
> thoug
On 20 Jul 2013, at 00:21, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
>
> On 19 Jul 2013, at 23:17, John Dennis wrote:
>
>> I've built on Fedora and the unreleased RHEL-7
>>
>> On RHEL-7 I built on the following architectures:
>>
>> ppc, s390, x86_64, ppc64, i686, s390x
>>
>> All of those built successfully
On 19 Jul 2013, at 23:17, John Dennis wrote:
> I've built on Fedora and the unreleased RHEL-7
>
> On RHEL-7 I built on the following architectures:
>
> ppc, s390, x86_64, ppc64, i686, s390x
>
> All of those built successfully but when I run one of our analysis tools
> it reports some problems
autotools configure script issue/question:
Why is udpfromto disabled by default? I thought udpfromto was necessary
for correct operation in some configurations and benign otherwise. I
thought the udpfromto option was added to 2.x because the issue was
discovered in the middle of the 2.x release st
On 17 Jul 2013, at 22:42, wrote:
> Sorry John,
>
> But you do have a tools package. It's called freeradius-utils. :-)
>
> I'd guess radattr probably fits nicely into that.
No it's part of the internal test framework. It's really of absolutely
no use to anyone except developers.
Really, real
rs-bounces+stefan.paetow=diamond.ac...@lists.freeradius.org] on
behalf of John Dennis [jden...@redhat.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 5:47 PM
To: FreeRadius users mailing list
Cc: Alan DeKok
Subject: Re: [ANN] Version 3.0.0-rc0
On 07/17/2013 12:26 PM, Alan DeKok wrote:
> John Dennis wrote:
>>
On 07/17/2013 04:16 PM, Alan Buxey wrote:
> Hi
>
> Don't you have freeradius-utils already. .. which contains radtest etc
> which is very useful for admins
Yes, my bad, sorry, not enough coffee.
John
--
jden...@redhat.com
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/user
Hi
Don't you have freeradius-utils already. .. which contains radtest etc which is
very useful for admins
alan
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
John Dennis wrote:
> Sure it's no problem for the spec file to ignore them but I'm wondering
> if they are valuable for testing won't others find them useful too? If
> so shouldn't we keep them and add a man page?
Maybe. radattr is really a test tool for RFC6929 attributes. And now
for parsing
On 17 Jul 2013, at 17:47, John Dennis wrote:
> On 07/17/2013 12:26 PM, Alan DeKok wrote:
>> John Dennis wrote:
>>> The following are installed in either /bin or /usr/sbin but there are no
>>> corresponding man pages. Every command installed needs to have a man page.
>>>
>>> dhcpclient
>>> radat
On 07/17/2013 12:26 PM, Alan DeKok wrote:
> John Dennis wrote:
>> The following are installed in either /bin or /usr/sbin but there are no
>> corresponding man pages. Every command installed needs to have a man page.
>>
>> dhcpclient
>> radattr
>
> Hmm... those two probably shouldn't be installe
John Dennis wrote:
> 1) The redhat directory is populated with the old 2.x spec file, no
> sense in updating this until we have a good 3.x spec file, but it should
> be updated prior to the official 3.0 release.
OK. I've pushed a simple change which gets rid of 10 years of
changelog at least.
I've been going through the packaging effort for 3.0 for Fedora/RHEL.
BTW, many thanks to Stefan Paetow who did an initial spec file, Stefan's
work has been a big help.
I'm coming up with a list of issues as I find them, more to come later,
but for now ...
1) The redhat directory is populated wit
Stefan Winter wrote:
> git.freeradius.org has a link to:
>
> http://github.com/alandekok/freeradius-server/tree/master
Fixed.
Alan DeKok.
-
List info/subscribe/unsubscribe? See http://www.freeradius.org/list/users.html
Hi,
> Anything wrong with github?
Oh, never mind that.
git.freeradius.org has a link to:
http://github.com/alandekok/freeradius-server/tree/master
which is probably not the best place to link to.
Sure, if you read the github notice on that page it'll tell you
"Alan DeKok's private copy of th
On 17 Jul 2013, at 07:59, Stefan Winter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'd love to try.
>
> looking at GITHUB's master branch, I see that the latest commit was 5
> months ago, and the last tag is 3_0_0_beta1 ?
You're possibly looking at Alan's repo?
> Anything wrong with github?
No, we switched to hostin
Hi,
I'd love to try.
looking at GITHUB's master branch, I see that the latest commit was 5
months ago, and the last tag is 3_0_0_beta1 ?
There's also no other branch name that suggests recent versions.
Anything wrong with github?
Stefan
On 16.07.2013 15:15, Alan DeKok wrote:
> Stefan Winter w
Stefan Winter wrote:
> (0) ERROR: %{#User-Password}
> (0) ERROR: ^ Unknown attribute
> (0) ERROR: Evaluation of condition failed for some reason.
> (0)else else {
> (0) - entering else else {...}
>
> Earlier, this would yield the number of characters in the incoming
> request's User-Passwo
Stefan Winter wrote:
> Earlier, this would yield the number of characters in the incoming
> request's User-Password attribute, and see if it's exactly 96 Bytes.
>
> I don't know why the # triggers an "unknown attribute"? Looks like a bug
> to me...
I'll take a look.
Alan DeKok.
-
List info/s
Hi,
> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x configuration
> you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now would be a good
> time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic behaviour changes
> you notice.
Here's another thing that worked in 2.x,
On 15 Jul 2013, at 15:13, Stefan Winter wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> I'll double check the default configs to make sure they list it and update
>>> the documentation.
>>
>>
>> Fixes pushed for behaviour, and to fixup the default config files.
>
> Good news!
>
> Just wondering: the files being writte
Hi,
>> I'll double check the default configs to make sure they list it and update
>> the documentation.
>
>
> Fixes pushed for behaviour, and to fixup the default config files.
Good news!
Just wondering: the files being written to are properly locked & thread
waits for the lock - right? I hav
On 15 Jul 2013, at 11:10, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
>
> On 15 Jul 2013, at 10:30, Stefan Winter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x
>>> configuration you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now
>>> would be a good time to tr
On 15 Jul 2013, at 10:30, Stefan Winter wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x
>> configuration you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now
>> would be a good time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic
>> behaviour chan
Hi,
> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x configuration
> you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now would be a good
> time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic behaviour changes
> you notice.
I must be missing something pretty obviou
On 15 Jul 2013, at 10:04, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
>
> On 15 Jul 2013, at 09:30, Stefan Winter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>>> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x
>>> configuration you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now
>>> would be a good time to tr
On 15 Jul 2013, at 09:30, Stefan Winter wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x
>> configuration you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now
>> would be a good time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic
>> behaviour chan
Hi,
On 15.07.2013 10:24, Alan DeKok wrote:
> # mv raddb raddb-noinst
> # mkdir raddb
> # touch raddb/all.mk
> # make install
that's easy enough, thanks!
Stefan
--
Stefan WINTER
Ingenieur de Recherche
Fondation RESTENA - Réseau Téléinformatique de l'Education Nationale et
de la Recherche
6, rue
Hi,
> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x configuration
> you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now would be a good
> time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic behaviour changes
> you notice.
The errors for people upgrading from 2.x
Stefan Winter wrote:
> Now, with 3.0.0 if I try the same trick, I get:
>
> # mv raddb raddb-noinst
> # make install
> scripts/boiler.mk:552: raddb/all.mk: No such file or directory
> make: *** No rule to make target `raddb/all.mk'. Stop.
>
> I understand that the urgency of preserving existing c
Hi,
> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x configuration
> you were planning to migrate when the 3.0 is released, now would be a good
> time to try that, and to report any issues or problematic behaviour changes
> you notice.
Here's one thing during make install that
On 11 July 2013, at 15:24, Arran Cudbard-Bell wrote:
>
> On 11 Jul 2013, at 22:39, Doug Hardie wrote:
>
>>
>> On 11 July 2013, at 06:09, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell
>>> wrote:
>>> We are now in feature freeze for 3.0. The configurati
On 11 Jul 2013, at 22:39, Doug Hardie wrote:
>
> On 11 July 2013, at 06:09, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell
>> wrote:
>> We are now in feature freeze for 3.0. The configuration format and behaviour
>> for 3.0 will be stable between now and t
On 11 July 2013, at 06:09, Fajar A. Nugraha wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell
> wrote:
> We are now in feature freeze for 3.0. The configuration format and behaviour
> for 3.0 will be stable between now and the final release.
>
> If you are planning on deploying 3.
freeradius.org
> [mailto:freeradius-users-
> bounces+stefan.paetow=diamond.ac...@lists.freeradius.org] On Behalf Of
> Arran Cudbard-Bell
> Sent: 11 July 2013 16:12
> To: FreeRadius users mailing list
> Subject: Re: [ANN] Version 3.0.0-rc0
>
>
> On 11 Jul 2013, at 16:01, Olivier
On 11 Jul 2013, at 16:01, Olivier Beytrison wrote:
> On 11.07.2013 16:44, stefan.pae...@diamond.ac.uk wrote:
Did you mean https://github.com/FreeRADIUS/freeradius-
>>> server/archive/release_3_0_0_rc0.tar.gz ?
>>
>> I'm afraid I'm getting a build error (from fresh):
> [snip]
>> /usr/bin/ld
On 11.07.2013 16:44, stefan.pae...@diamond.ac.uk wrote:
>>> Did you mean https://github.com/FreeRADIUS/freeradius-
>> server/archive/release_3_0_0_rc0.tar.gz ?
>
> I'm afraid I'm getting a build error (from fresh):
[snip]
> /usr/bin/ld: cannot find -lregex
> collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
> m
> > Did you mean https://github.com/FreeRADIUS/freeradius-
> server/archive/release_3_0_0_rc0.tar.gz ?
I'm afraid I'm getting a build error (from fresh):
HEADER src/include/features.h
HEADER src/include/missing.h
HEADER src/include/tls.h
CC jlibtool.c
CC src/lib/dict.c
CC src/lib/filters.c
CC src
On 11 Jul 2013, at 14:09, "Fajar A. Nugraha" wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell
> wrote:
> We are now in feature freeze for 3.0. The configuration format and behaviour
> for 3.0 will be stable between now and the final release.
>
> If you are planning on deploying 3
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Arran Cudbard-Bell <
a.cudba...@freeradius.org> wrote:
> We are now in feature freeze for 3.0. The configuration format and
> behaviour for 3.0 will be stable between now and the final release.
>
> If you are planning on deploying 3.0 and have an existing 2.x.x
> c
46 matches
Mail list logo