[OPEN-ILS-DEV] Debian version/GCC version

Sun Feb 18 18:48:53 EST 2007

On 2/18/07, Mike Rylander <mrylander at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2/18/07, Don McMorris <don.mcmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Grace:
> > Sorry for not being available when you IM'd.
> >
> > On 2/18/07, Grace Liu <gyliu86 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thanks, Bill. So, you are using Gentoo, not using Debian Sarge or Etch. I
> > > just want to keep the same environment with yours so that I can set up the
> > > system and maybe do some development on it.
> > >
> > > But I am confused as in the documentation wiki on openils.org. It mentioned
> > > "Install has been tested on Debian Testing and Unstable. Stable was missing
> > > a few packages that were needed. It can probably be done but there will be
> > > some extra software to install manually."
> > > (http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=installing_prerequisites_on_debian)
> > > and "This is a work in progress, I don't actually have Open-ILS running on
> > > Gentoo yet"
> > > (http://open-ils.org/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=installing_prerequisites_on_gentoo)
> >
> > Apologies for the confusion Grace.  PINES uses (and develops against)
> > Gentoo.  The Debian build was attempted (I forget by whom though), and
> > the Wiki information is just copy-and-paste of what he did.
>
> PINES production servers are Debian (Etch, I believe).
> /etc/debian_version says testing/unstable.  They have a custom kernel
> and use GCC 4.1.2 (Bill's message up-thread).
My error.  I think the last time I participated in discussion about
the OS base was back pre-alpha (As I recall, at that time Evergreen
was on Evergreen with the web site on Debian).

>
> I think some of Bill's dev servers are Debian now, but I still develop
> exclusively on a Gentoo box.  The GCC on my dev box is slightly
> different than Bill's Gentoo GCC (gcc --version says "gcc (GCC) 3.4.4
> (Gentoo 3.4.4-r1, ssp-3.4.4-1.0, pie-8.7.8)") but we haven't
> experienced any GCC related failures, as far as I know.
>
> >
> > >
> > > Then, I need more information on the environment:
> > > 1) Linux version (Gentoo? Debian?, linux kernel 2.6.16? /2.6.19?)
> > > 2) Apache2 version
> > > 3) PostgreSQL version
> > I believe success has been greatest in Gentoo w/a 2.6.x kernel.
> > Apache 2.0.x was used for a while, but Bill did say in a fairly recent
> > e-mail to the list saying they're starting to utilize some of the 2.2
> > features (he'll write back to clarify what's best I'm sure).
>
> I don't see any reason that any particular kernel or distro will be
> "better" -- the only difference of substance (as far as Evergreen
> proper is concerned) will be the ease of fulfilling the dependencies.
> I prefer Gentoo's emerge, but apt works well too and I'm sure that
> RedHat/Fedora can be made to work.  Another list member is making
> headway on a Solaris installation, too.  The best advice in my opinion
> is "use what you know".
>
> > >
> > > I want to install all apache2 and postgreSQL using package/binary (much
> > > easier and faster) according to the documentation wiki on openils.org, . Any
> > > problem or concern with this method?
> > Most of the work has been done from source, but binaries should be
> > doable.  I don't anticipate any problems with Postgres as Binary, but
> > Miker can verify this (I think he's the DB guru...).
>
> Distribution built Postgres packages will work fine (with one
> caveat*), and the most recent release of the 8.1 series (8.1.8 is the
> latest available directly from http://postgresql.org at the moment) is
> the best choice.  I am beginning to look at the 8.2 series -- there
> are some exciting indexing options in 8.2 -- but it is mostly
> untested.  I expect it would work fine, but we I haven't tested
> thoroughly yet.
>
> * [I build my own PG due to some limitations in indexed text field
> size -- not full-text indexing, but exact field BTree indexing used
> for sorting purposes.  I change the BLCKSZ #define to 32k (up from the
> default of 8k), which can be done by editing
> src/include/pg_config_manual.h in the Postgres source tarball before
> building. This allows text fields of up to (about) 10k to be indexed
> directly, which is approximately the max size of an entire MARC
> record. I'll be looking at changing the way sorting is used, which
> will remove the need for this safeguard.]
>
> > As far as Apache, you should be able to load modules like you've
> > attempted, but I think it's preferred to have the stuff compiled in.
> > Bill should comment.
> > >
> > > Also, if possible, could send me following files your are using now(I just
> > > want to config the system correctly and easily):
> > > 1) evergreen_vhost.conf
> > > 2) evergreen_vhost_ssl.conf
> > > 3) opensrf_core.xml
> > > 4) openils.xml
> > > 5) opensrf.xml
> > Bill said something about putting these in CVS.  Not sure if it's done yet...
> > >
> > > By the way, in your CVS repository
> > > (http://open-ils.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/), there is a tar
> > > file. Every time, you commit to the CVS, do you also make a tar file using
> > > the new committed files?
> > If we're thinking of the same one, I think the viewcvs script
> > generates this tar on-the-fly when you request it.  Because the public
> > CVS is updated hourly from the internal one, it is technically
> > possible for a tar you download to be different than that somebody
> > else downloads an hour later.
>
> Exactly right.  For stable release tarballs, just download the latest
> from the Releases section of http://open-ils.org/cvs.html .
>
> > >
> > > Too many questions, but I really need your help.
> > No problem at all Grace! We look forward to working with you and being
> > able to help each-other out.  If you have IRC capability, consider
> > checking into #GAPINES on the freenode network (it's not terribly
> > active, but replies may be slightly quicker).
> >
> > --Don
> >
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Grace
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >  ________________________________
> > >  Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2007 11:18:11 -0500
> > > From: billserickson at gmail.com
> > > To: open-ils-dev at list.georgialibraries.org
> > > Subject: Re: [OPEN-ILS-DEV] Debian version/GCC version
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2/18/07, Grace Liu <gyliu86 at hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Hi
> > >
> > > What is the debian version/kernel version and GCC version you are using now
> > > and what is the latest debian version/kernel version and GCC version the
> > > openils was tested that works?
> > >
> > >
> > > Mostly Linux kernel = 2.6.16
> > > We're currently testing 2.6.19
> > >
> > > ---------------
> > >
> > > GCC = gcc version 4.1.2 20060613 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-5)
> > >
> > > We're testing gcc version 4.1.2 20061028 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-19)
> > >
> > > Also, for what it's worth, our Gentoo test boxes use gcc version 3.4.3
> > > 20041125 (Gentoo 3.4.3-r1, ssp-3.4.3-0, pie-8.7.7),
> > >
> > > Note that GCC 4 prints a lot of warnings when you compile (X and Y differ in
> > > signedness...).  You can ignore those.
> > >
> > > -bill
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Bill Erickson
> > > PINES Systems Developer
> > > Georgia Public Library Service
> > > billserickson at gmail.com
> > > http://open-ils.org
> > > ________________________________
> > > Stay up-to-date with your friends through the Windows Live™ Spaces friends
> > > list. Check it out!
> >
>
>
> --
> Mike Rylander
> mrylander at gmail.com
> GPLS -- PINES Development
> Database Developer
> http://open-ils.org
>

I love G-Mail ;)
--Don