Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Shabbir S. Talib]

Hi Listers

I extracted the source to /usr/local/db-3.2.9

After that configure and make went through fine.
However, when i run make install it ends with an
following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
1

Prior to this message I see the following error
message about 10 times.

/usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
'/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
No such file or directory

I am new to the Unix world, so please add an extra
cent to your two. Thanks in advance.

Shabbir S. Talib


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Charles Wilson]

"Shabbir S. Talib" wrote:
> 
> Hi Listers
> 
> I extracted the source to /usr/local/db-3.2.9
> 
> After that configure and make went through fine.
> However, when i run make install it ends with an
> following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
> 1
> 
> Prior to this message I see the following error
> message about 10 times.
> 
> /usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
> '/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
> No such file or directory
> 
> I am new to the Unix world, so please add an extra
> cent to your two. Thanks in advance.

BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires certain
changes in order to compile.  Use
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
until somebody ports 3.x.

--Chuck

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

RE: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Shabbir S. Talib]

Hi Listers

I continue to face the same problem with db-2.7.7.

> However, when i run make install it ends with an
> following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
> 1
>
> Prior to this message I see the following error
> message about 10 times.
>
> /usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
> '/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
> No such file or directory

BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires
certain
changes in order to compile.  Use
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
until somebody ports 3.x.


________________
Shabbir S. Talib
CCNA, CNE, MCSE
-------------------------
Information Gateways Inc.
Project @ DC Fire and EMS
1923 VERMONT AVE. NW
WASHINGTON, DC 20001
Tel: 202-673-3786
Fax: 202-673-3709


-----Original Message-----
From: cwilson@ece.gatech.edu [ mailto:cwilson@ece.gatech.edu ]
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:11 PM
To: shabbir@talib.com
Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
Subject: Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9


"Shabbir S. Talib" wrote:
>
> Hi Listers
>
> I extracted the source to /usr/local/db-3.2.9
>
> After that configure and make went through fine.
> However, when i run make install it ends with an
> following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
> 1
>
> Prior to this message I see the following error
> message about 10 times.
>
> /usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
> '/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
> No such file or directory
>
> I am new to the Unix world, so please add an extra
> cent to your two. Thanks in advance.

BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires
certain
changes in order to compile.  Use
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
until somebody ports 3.x.

--Chuck

Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Charles S. Wilson]

sounds to me like you're using the "stock" db-2.7.7 from Sleepycat and 
not the patched version that I recommended.  The patched source code can 
can be found here:

http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/

--Chuck

Shabbir S. Talib wrote:

> Hi Listers
> 
> I continue to face the same problem with db-2.7.7.
> 
> 
>>However, when i run make install it ends with an
>>following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
>>1
>>
>>Prior to this message I see the following error
>>message about 10 times.
>>
>>/usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
>>'/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
>>No such file or directory
>>
> 
> BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires
> certain
> changes in order to compile.  Use
> http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
> until somebody ports 3.x.
> 
> 
> ________________
> Shabbir S. Talib
> CCNA, CNE, MCSE
> -------------------------
> Information Gateways Inc.
> Project @ DC Fire and EMS
> 1923 VERMONT AVE. NW
> WASHINGTON, DC 20001
> Tel: 202-673-3786
> Fax: 202-673-3709
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cwilson@ece.gatech.edu [ mailto:cwilson@ece.gatech.edu ]
> Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 4:11 PM
> To: shabbir@talib.com
> Cc: cygwin@cygwin.com
> Subject: Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9
> 
> 
> "Shabbir S. Talib" wrote:
> 
>>Hi Listers
>>
>>I extracted the source to /usr/local/db-3.2.9
>>
>>After that configure and make went through fine.
>>However, when i run make install it ends with an
>>following message make: *** [install_utilities] Error
>>1
>>
>>Prior to this message I see the following error
>>message about 10 times.
>>
>>/usr/bin/cp: preserving time for
>>'/usr/local/BerkeleyDB.3.2/bin/{name of a utility}':
>>No such file or directory
>>
>>I am new to the Unix world, so please add an extra
>>cent to your two. Thanks in advance.
>>
> 
> BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires
> certain
> changes in order to compile.  Use
> http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
> until somebody ports 3.x.
> 
> --Chuck
> 
> 



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Jason Tishler]

Chuck,

On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:10:48PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires certain
> changes in order to compile.  Use
> http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
> until somebody ports 3.x.

Just a FYI, but Berkeley DB 3.2.9 does build OOTB under Cygwin.  From
the Berkeley DB 3.2.9 Change Log:

    http://www.sleepycat.com/update/3.2.9/if.3.2.9.html

we have:

    Berkeley DB now works with the Cygwin tools. You need at least DLL
    version 1.1.4. Configure and build as you would on a Unix system. Only
    static library builds are supported, no shared library support is
    included. [#2913]

I also verified this empirically.

Now, if I could just get rpm 4.0.2 to build with it.  Sigh...

Jason

-- 
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering       Phone: 732.264.8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corp.               Fax:   732.264.8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7             Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA                 WWW:   http://www.dothill.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9

[Charles S. Wilson]

Jason Tishler wrote:

> Chuck,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 04:10:48PM -0400, Charles Wilson wrote:
> 
>> BerkeleyDB-3.x has not yet been ported to cygwin -- it requires certain
>> changes in order to compile.  Use
>> http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/V1.1/db-2.7.7/
>> until somebody ports 3.x.
> 
> 
> Just a FYI, but Berkeley DB 3.2.9 does build OOTB under Cygwin.  From
> the Berkeley DB 3.2.9 Change Log:
> 
>     http://www.sleepycat.com/update/3.2.9/if.3.2.9.html
> 
> we have:
> 
>     Berkeley DB now works with the Cygwin tools. You need at least DLL
>     version 1.1.4. Configure and build as you would on a Unix system. Only
>     static library builds are supported, no shared library support is
>     included. [#2913]
> 
> I also verified this empirically.

Excelent.  This means that the only changes to db-3.2.9 that would be 
necessary are those for enabling dll-build.  Cool.

> 
> Now, if I could just get rpm 4.0.2 to build with it.  Sigh...

Hmm.  Well that's a bummer.

--Chuck


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

rpm 4.0.2 Build Problem (was Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9)

[Jason Tishler]

Chuck,

On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 08:28:12PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> Jason Tishler wrote:
> > Now, if I could just get rpm 4.0.2 to build with it.  Sigh...
> 
> Hmm.  Well that's a bummer.

It is probably some bone-headed thing that I'm doing or not doing.
Nevertheless, Berkeley DB 3.2.9 make install does not seem to produce
the installation structure that I have found on one of our Linux boxes.
Do people routinely postprocess what is produced by make install?
Note that the current version does the same thing that your 2.7.7 did.

Unfortunately, the rpm source has hardcoded constructs such as:

    #include <db3/db.h>

I was able to workaround this problem with mkdirs and symlinks, but I did
this after configure.  Possibly by not having the environment "correct"
before I ran configure caused rpm to configure itself improperly.

Jason

-- 
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering       Phone: 732.264.8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corp.               Fax:   732.264.8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7             Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA                 WWW:   http://www.dothill.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: rpm 4.0.2 Build Problem (was Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9)

[Charles S. Wilson]

Jason Tishler wrote:

> Chuck,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 08:28:12PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> 
>>Jason Tishler wrote:
>>
>>>Now, if I could just get rpm 4.0.2 to build with it.  Sigh...
>>>
>>Hmm.  Well that's a bummer.
>>
> 
> It is probably some bone-headed thing that I'm doing or not doing.
> Nevertheless, Berkeley DB 3.2.9 make install does not seem to produce
> the installation structure that I have found on one of our Linux boxes.
> Do people routinely postprocess what is produced by make install?



People?  Cygwin maintainers usually don't -- "make install ; 
make-tarball" (e.g. in the case of my packages, you can see exactly what 
steps I take by looking at the Cygwin/*.README's.)

Distro maintainers (like Red Hat, Deb) -- all the time.  Take a look at 
the spec files from your "Linux boxes" db rpms.  In order to allow db3 
and db2 and db1 to coexist, I bet the RPM-builders harmonized all three 
packages, either by patching the make install process or explictly 
rearranging things using extra commands in the spec file after 'make 
install'.  Grab the db3 rpm's (or debs, whatever) and unpack using
    rpm2cpio <fn> | cpio -i --make-directories
and inspect the patches and spec file.


> Note that the current version does the same thing that your 2.7.7 did.
> 
> Unfortunately, the rpm source has hardcoded constructs such as:
> 
>     #include <db3/db.h>


Since rpm is more-or-less maintained by Red Hat, I wouldn't be surprised 
if the official rpm source code depended on the installed structure of 
the db3/db2/db1 libraries under Red Hat's "harmonization".


> I was able to workaround this problem with mkdirs and symlinks, but I did
> this after configure.  Possibly by not having the environment "correct"
> before I ran configure caused rpm to configure itself improperly.


Absolutely.  If you rearrange your directory structure between 
"configuring" and "making" stuff will definitely break.

--Chuck

P.S. Note that Michael Ring (who did some of the early porting work on db) has 

some patches for rpm-3.0.6, but I don't know if he continued working with 

rpm-4.x.y.  Michael, are you there?



--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: rpm 4.0.2 Build Problem (was Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9)

[Jason Tishler]

Chuck,

On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 03:15:26PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> Jason Tishler wrote:
> > Note that the current version does the same thing that your 2.7.7 did.
> > 
> > Unfortunately, the rpm source has hardcoded constructs such as:
> > 
> >     #include <db3/db.h>
> 
> Since rpm is more-or-less maintained by Red Hat, I wouldn't be surprised 
> if the official rpm source code depended on the installed structure of 
> the db3/db2/db1 libraries under Red Hat's "harmonization".
> 
> > I was able to workaround this problem with mkdirs and symlinks, but I did
> > this after configure.  Possibly by not having the environment "correct"
> > before I ran configure caused rpm to configure itself improperly.
> 
> Absolutely.  If you rearrange your directory structure between 
> "configuring" and "making" stuff will definitely break.

I followed your advice and read the spec file from the Red Hat db 3.2.9
RPM.  I used the information gleaned to post process make install to
match the harmonization mentioned above.  Then I reran configure on rpm.
Finally, after some head banging I managed to "build" rpm.

It appears that the rpm (4.0.2) package is very Linux centric.  I will
entertain posting a patch once I figure out the right way to correct all
of the issue.  I guess that it is time to learn automake.  Sigh...

BTW, the test suite also seems very Linux centric -- hardcoded paths,
expected output such as "ld-linux.so.2", etc.  Did you every try to run
the test suite for your rpm 3.0.3 package?  If so, what were the results?

Thanks,
Jason

-- 
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering       Phone: 732.264.8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corp.               Fax:   732.264.8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7             Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA                 WWW:   http://www.dothill.com

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: rpm 4.0.2 Build Problem (was Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9)

[Charles S. Wilson]

[side note: CC'ed to Gary Vaughn because there's a short listing of 
cygwin-related errata in the goat book at the bottom of this email.]

Jason Tishler wrote

> On Fri, Jul 13, 2001 at 03:15:26PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> 
>> Jason Tishler wrote:
>> 
>>> Note that the current version does the same thing that your 2.7.7 did.
>>> 
>>> Unfortunately, the rpm source has hardcoded constructs such as:
>>> 
>>>     #include <db3/db.h>
>> 
>> Since rpm is more-or-less maintained by Red Hat, I wouldn't be surprised 
>> if the official rpm source code depended on the installed structure of 
>> the db3/db2/db1 libraries under Red Hat's "harmonization".
>> 
>> 
>>> I was able to workaround this problem with mkdirs and symlinks, but I did
>>> this after configure.  Possibly by not having the environment "correct"
>>> before I ran configure caused rpm to configure itself improperly.
>> 
>> Absolutely.  If you rearrange your directory structure between 
>> "configuring" and "making" stuff will definitely break.
> 
> 
> I followed your advice and read the spec file from the Red Hat db 3.2.9
> RPM.  I used the information gleaned to post process make install to
> match the harmonization mentioned above.  Then I reran configure on rpm.
> Finally, after some head banging I managed to "build" rpm.

Wow.  That's great -- and a lot of work, I'll bet.  Muchas gracias.

 
> It appears that the rpm (4.0.2) package is very Linux centric. 

Yep.  More Red Hat-edness, I think.

> I will
> entertain posting a patch once I figure out the right way to correct all
> of the issue.  I guess that it is time to learn automake.  Sigh...

See the goat book: http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/ if you haven't 
already done so. Chapter 25: Using GNU Autotools with Cygnus Cygwin is 
especially interesting (if slightly out-of-date (*)).

 
> BTW, the test suite also seems very Linux centric -- hardcoded paths,
> expected output such as "ld-linux.so.2", etc.  Did you every try to run
> the test suite for your rpm 3.0.3 package? 

Nope.  (Did rpm-3.x HAVE a test suite?) My testing was empirical:
   a) build an rpm
   b) install the rpm
    Q: manually check and see that everything got installed to the right 
place, and that pre/post-install scripts were run.
   c) erase the rpm
    Q: manually check that everything got removed, and that 
pre/post-uninstall scripts were run.
   d) randomly try a few interdependent rpm's.  Make sure dependencies 
work properly.  do a bunch of 'rpm -q' stuff.

That's all I ever did.  Remember, I built cygwin-rpm for a VERY narrowly 
defined purpose: I wanted the users of my cygwin-perl to be able to 
install RPM's of perl modules independently.  Since perl modules have 
interdependencies, I couldn't just do tarballs.  So: rpm.

That is, the purpose for which I built and provided rpm "back in the 
day" was not very taxing.  It didn't use many of the more esoteric 
features of rpm -- and it was based on the simpler 3.x rpm program/format.

--Chuck

(*) e.g. the goat book was current as of cygwin-1.1.1, which was 
released on May 14, 2000.  Many things have changed (for the better) 
since then.
   1) -mno-cygwin now links against msvcrt.dll, not crtdll.dll
   2) cygutils.netpedia.net is defunct; it died without warning during 
December 2000 and the domain sold off to "elipse communications".  I 
couldn't even log in; fortunately I keep backups.  The new location is 
http://www.neuro.gatech.edu/users/cwilson/cygutils/  -- but it isn't 
necessary to go there for perl, since perl can now be downloaded from 
the normal cygwin mirrors using setup.exe.  Ditto autoconf.  Ditto ditto 
automake.
   3) HOWEVER -- since automake, autoconf, and libtool all share the 
same ac-local directory, and since the "official" cygwin versions of 
automake and autoconf now install under /usr (not /usr/local), your 
libtool must also be built to install into /usr if it is to interoperate 
with the official auto[make|conf] packages.  (The older cygutils 
versions of those packages installed into /usr/local, so the goat book 
sez to install libtool into /usr/local.  This is now incorrect.)
   4) CYGWIN=binmode doesn't do what the goat book sez it does.
   5) mount output now looks different.
   6) I don't even want to discuss the DLL stuff.  It's changing 
rapidly, anyway.


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

Re: rpm 4.0.2 Build Problem (was Re: Installing Berkeley DB 3.2.9)

[Jason Tishler]

Chuck,

On Mon, Jul 16, 2001 at 08:20:16PM -0400, Charles S. Wilson wrote:
> Jason Tishler wrote
> > I followed your advice and read the spec file from the Red Hat db 3.2.9
> > RPM.  I used the information gleaned to post process make install to
> > match the harmonization mentioned above.  Then I reran configure on rpm.
> > Finally, after some head banging I managed to "build" rpm.
> 
> Wow.  That's great -- and a lot of work, I'll bet.

Actually, it was too bad -- it was a piece of cake compared to my Python
work.  I didn't even need any aspirin this time.  OK, maybe my head is
just getting harder... :,)

> Muchas gracias.

You are very welcome.

> > I will
> > entertain posting a patch once I figure out the right way to correct all
> > of the issue.  I guess that it is time to learn automake.  Sigh...
> 
> See the goat book: http://sources.redhat.com/autobook/ if you haven't 
> already done so. Chapter 25: Using GNU Autotools with Cygnus Cygwin is 
> especially interesting (if slightly out-of-date (*)).

Thanks for reminding me about the above.  I read most of the Cygwin
sections before (when Gary first announced it) and I just reread the
relevant sections again today.

See attached for a patch that enables rpm 4.0.2 to build under the
latest Cygwin.  The procedure to apply the patch and build is as follows:

    $ # save the attachment to /tmp/rpm-4.0.2.patch
    $ wget -nd -P /tmp ftp://ftp.rpm.org/pub/rpm/dist/rpm-4.0.x/rpm-4.0.2.tar.gz
    $ tar -xzf /tmp/rpm-4.0.2.tar.gz
    $ cd rpm-4.0.2
    $ patch -p1 </tmp/rpm-4.0.2.patch
    $ aclocal
    $ autoconf
    $ automake
    $ configure
    $ make

Unfortunately, the above has the following dependencies/caveats:

    1. The aclocal step requires libtool.m4 in order to resolve
       AM_PROG_LIBTOOL.  Since I did not already have libtool installed,
       I just used the libtool.m4 from the libtool 1.3.5 tarball (which
       is the version expected by rpm 4.0.2).

    2. The aclocal step also seems to require the version of gettext.m4
       from 0.10.35.  If aclocal found the 0.10.38 version, then either
       autoconf or automake got confused such that half of the build
       wanted to use the included gettext while the other half did not.
       My workaround was to temporarily replace my gettext.m4 with the
       older one.
    
    3. The rpm source implicitly assumes that the db 3.x.y (i.e., 3.2.9)
       installation has the following directory structure and naming
       convention:

       lrwxrwxrwx <prefix>/include/db.h -> db3/db.h
       drwxr-xr-x <prefix>/include/db3/
       -r--r--r-- <prefix>/include/db3/db.h
       -r--r--r-- <prefix>/include/db3/db_185.h
       -r--r--r-- <prefix>/include/db3/db_cxx.h
       drwxr-xr-x <prefix>/lib/
       -r--r--r-- <prefix>/lib/libdb-3.1.a

I am most unhappy about #2, do you (or anyone else) know what is awry?
Also, would you (or anyone else) be interested in critiquing my patch?
My biggest concern is with the tools/Makefile.am hunk -- maybe this
should be conditional for Cygwin only?

I'm willing to submit the patch for consideration once I get some
feedback and some the above issues are resolved or dismissed.

Thanks,
Jason

-- 
Jason Tishler
Director, Software Engineering       Phone: 732.264.8770 x235
Dot Hill Systems Corp.               Fax:   732.264.8798
82 Bethany Road, Suite 7             Email: Jason.Tishler@dothill.com
Hazlet, NJ 07730 USA                 WWW:   http://www.dothill.com