** Reply to message from Paul Bijnens <paul.bijnens AT xplanation DOT com> on 
Sun, 22
Feb 2004 14:39:28 +0100


> Erik P. Olsen wrote:
> 
> > I am currently trying to implement amanda on a Fedora Core 1 system. It
> > actually contains a precompiled amanda but in order to change its use of
> > directories you'll have to recompile it. I thought - rather naively - that 
> > it
> > would be piece of cake. Nah, lots of compile errors due to missing header
> > files. So I downloaded version 2.4.4p2 in rpm format and installed it 
> > instead
> > of the former version 2.4.4p1, but it has the same non-standard use of
> > directories. 
> 
> What do you mean with "non-standard"?  It is actually quiet standard.
> (Or do you mean that is does not put things in /usr/local?  /usr/local
> is things that you install yourself, to keep them seperate from vendor
> supplied programs.)
> 
> If you have header files missing, you could just as well download those
> rpms, and then try to compile again.

OK, I understand that you say between the lines that there ought not to be any
problem compiling amanda, so I'll give it another try with fresh downloads.
> 
> > So I am up to another compile. This time I would like to hear if there are 
> > any
> > known gotchas with this operation. Are there any patches I must have? Or 
> > should
> > I dump Redhat's version of amanda and get something else? And what?
> 
> To compile you just need a decent compilation environment.  If amanda
> wouldn't compile, I doubt you can compile any program (except maybe
> "hello.c", and that proves only you have a C-compiler).

I suppose FC1 *is* a "decent compilation environment".

Thanks,
Erik P. Olsen