On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 10:36 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > On a side note i tried a clean centos 5.6 i386 build(had the disk kicking > around) updated it to 5.7, installed the dep's and had a issue with the > build even after i had provided all the deps. > > http://pastebin.com/2PiLaCYk
Thank you for the build report! All of the errors that I saw in that log came from a dependencies not being present, so the build process attempted to build that dependency automatically, and then it failed due to missing some library or header file needed to compile. Your method of installing the needed RPM packages and rebuilding worked to get past that. This process would be faster and easier the more packages are built by a volunteer for Python 2.4 and hosted here: https://tahoe-lafs.org/source/tahoe-lafs/deps/tahoe-lafs-dep-eggs/README.html Currently we have a PyCrypto for Python 2.4 on linux-x86_64 and that's all. If we had one each of Twisted, pyOpenSSL, PyCrypto, pycryptopp, zfec, and zope.interface for linux-i686, then your build would have been faster and would have worked the first time. It would have downloaded the .egg's of each of those packages from that site instead of attempting to compile anything. In fact, you would have been able to run "python setup.py build" and have a complete build of tahoe-lafs without even having gcc installed. There is one thing in your build log that I don't understand. I don't understand why it worked when you tried to build again after you hit this bug in building pyOpenSSL: https://bugs.launchpad.net/pyopenssl/+bug/845445 (By the way, you should log into launchpad.net and click on the little yellow pencil icon next to "This bug affects me." on that page.) Hm, I see that the first time you built, it downloaded pyOpenSSL 0.13 from http://pypi.python.org/packages/source/p/pyOpenSSL/pyOpenSSL-0.13.tar.gz and the second time you built it, it downloaded pyOpenSSL 0.11 from https://tahoe-lafs.org/source/tahoe-lafs/deps/tahoe-dep-sdists/pyOpenSSL-0.11.tar.gz . I wonder why? Anyway, that's how you got past that problem. By the way, we're currently planning for Tahoe-LAFS v1.9.1 to be the last version of Tahoe-LAFS that is backwards-compatible with Python 2.4. In order to install a future Tahoe-LAFS v1.10.0 on CentOS/RHEL 5, you'll probably have to install a newer Python that system first. Please see this ticket: https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1658 . Regards, Zooko _______________________________________________ tahoe-dev mailing list [email protected] http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
