gnutls-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Why p11-kit-1 instead of p11-kit?


From: Jim Lloyd
Subject: Re: Why p11-kit-1 instead of p11-kit?
Date: Fri, 16 Mar 2012 15:00:14 -0700

Ok, I found the root cause. On this system the shared libraries in /usr/local/lib64 were not being found. This caused some of the checks run by ./configure to fail but configure drew the wrong conclusions about the failure and produced an incorrect configuration. After adding /usr/local/lib64 to LD_LIBRARY_PATH, ./configure is able to produce a correct configuration, and gnutls builds.

There is one unusual error now when running make check:

Checking DSA-2048 with TLS 1.0
Failure: Succeeded connection to a server with DSA 2048 key and TLS 1.0. Should have failed!
FAIL: testdsa

I doubt this failure will impact me, but let me know if it is significant. I've cc'ed address@hidden@gnu.org.

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Jim Lloyd <address@hidden> wrote:
I added the directory that contains p11-kit-1.pc to PKG_CONFIG_PATH (first time I've ever had to do this) and was able to get ./configure for gnutls-2.12.17 to run without errors. However, make then fails with these errors:

make[6]: Entering directory `/home/jim/packages/gnutls-2.12.17/lib/gl'
  CC     c-ctype.lo
  CC     fd-hook.lo
  CC     read-file.lo
  CC     sockets.lo
  CC     asnprintf.lo
  CC     ftell.lo
  CC     ftello.lo
ftello.c: In function 'rpl_ftello':
ftello.c:45: error: 'fp_' undeclared (first use in this function)
ftello.c:45: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
ftello.c:45: error: for each function it appears in.)
ftello.c:45: error: '_IOWRT' undeclared (first use in this function)
make[6]: *** [ftello.lo] Error 1

This is on CentOS 6.0 using gcc 4.4.4 on x86_64.

This system has previously had gnutls 2.8.5 installed via yum. Did anything happen between 2.8.5 and 2.12.17 that I need to account for?

Ahh, actually I now notice that since 2.8.5 there is the option to use libnettle instead of libgcrypt. It's quite likely that I should built against libgcrypt. Are there other things like this that I need to be aware of?

To recap, I need to add support PKCS11 to an existing application that has to date been built against gnutls 2.8.5. I'd like to figure out the simplest upgrade path with gnutls to obtain PKCS11 support.

Thanks,
Jim

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Jim Lloyd <address@hidden> wrote:
I configure and install p11-kit using the usual incantation:

./configure && make && sudo make install

This seems to run without errors. However, 'make check' does report one test failure. I logged that failure:

Anyway, I would expect that the usual incantation should be enough to locate p11-kit when I configure GnuTLS. But it isn't able to find it. I've never needed to use pkg-config before so its still a bit mysterious to me, but I would expect that after installing p11-kit that one of these two commands would output something useful:

$ pkg-config --libs p11-kit
$ pkg-config --libs p11-kit-1

Both produce an error like this one (for the 2nd command above):
Package p11-kit-1 was not found in the pkg-config search path.
Perhaps you should add the directory containing `p11-kit-1.pc'
to the PKG_CONFIG_PATH environment variable
No package 'p11-kit-1' found

Is there some reason why I have to do something beyond the usual incantation when installing p11-kit?

Thanks,
Jim

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 12:01 AM, Nikos Mavrogiannopoulos <address@hidden> wrote:
On 03/15/2012 10:41 PM, Jim Lloyd wrote:

> Sorry to bug the list with this question, but this seems to be a case where
> Google does not know all.
>
> I'm attempting to build gnutls 2.12.17 on CentOS 6.0 x86-64. I'm doing this
> specifically for PKCS11 support, which we are adding to an existing product.
>
> I have built and installed p11-kit 0.12. But when I configure gnutls I get
> this error:
>
> checking for P11_KIT... configure: error: Package requirements (p11-kit-1
>> = 0.11) were not met:
> No package 'p11-kit-1' found
>
> Why p11-kit-1 instead of p11-kit? Does this indicate that I need a forked
> variant of p11-kit?


Not really. p11-kit advertises itself as p11-kit-1. You might want to
check config.log for the reason of non-detection.

regards,
Nikos






reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]