atom feed16 messages in net.sourceforge.lists.courier-usersRe: [courier-users] Re: Erroneous bui...
FromSent OnAttachments
Robin BowesOct 28, 2002 6:01 pm 
Sam VarshavchikOct 28, 2002 7:32 pm 
Robin BowesOct 29, 2002 2:15 am 
Juri HaberlandOct 29, 2002 2:25 am 
Robin BowesOct 29, 2002 4:43 am 
Sam VarshavchikOct 29, 2002 4:43 am 
Juri HaberlandOct 29, 2002 4:59 am 
Robin BowesOct 29, 2002 6:22 am 
Robin BowesOct 29, 2002 6:59 am 
Sam VarshavchikOct 29, 2002 2:56 pm 
Robin BowesOct 30, 2002 7:01 am 
Juha SaarinenOct 30, 2002 12:13 pm 
Robin BowesOct 30, 2002 3:06 pm 
Jesse KeatingOct 30, 2002 3:17 pm 
Robin BowesOct 31, 2002 9:36 am 
Jesse KeatingOct 31, 2002 10:56 am 
Subject:Re: [courier-users] Re: Erroneous build dependencies in courier-imap-1.6.0-20021025
From:Robin Bowes (robi@robinbowes.com)
Date:Oct 29, 2002 6:59:45 am
List:net.sourceforge.lists.courier-users

Sam,

Robin Bowes writes:

Sam,

FAM is optional, however it does provide for some value-added functionality. In the event that the additional value-added functionality is expected, the dependency provides a hint that the required prerequisites are missing.

Ok. Can you document this in the php build instructions?

What does PHP have to do with anything?

Okay, Okay, spot the typo. For "php" read "rpm". See my previous mail for suggested enhancements to rpm build documentation.

libstdc++-devel = 2.96 is needed by (installed) gcc-c++-2.96-110

So, to install FAM, I need to upgrade, amongst other things, php and gcc.

Only because you're trying to install FAM from RH 8.0 on RH 7.2.

See one of my previous replies. My server is somewhere between 7.2 and 8.0 following my abortive attempts to use apache2 (went back to apache1 as php isn't 100% on apache2). I'm not trying to justify it - just trying to explain why I might not want to install FAM on my box.

I revisited this following your reply and found that I actually have libstdc++.so.5 installed (from libstdc++-3.2-0.1) and I managed to install fam using the "--nodeps" option.

Congratulations -- you have a completely broken server.

Hmmm. What leads you to that conclusion? Ok, so it's not going to win any prizes for the cleanest package set but "completely broken"? I think not.

All of this is getting away from the thrust of my original point which is that courier-imap does not *need* FAM - it is an option that adds functionality, but is not essential. I came across this fact by chance when browsing through the Changelog.

Personally, I would remove fam-devel from the Deps. list in the spec file but, failing that, I think it would be useful to document the fact that this package is optional in the rpm build instructions.

Again, see my previous mail for suggested enhancements to rpm build documentation.

Cheers,

R.