Help! HELP! Can't "make" ipsec-tools on Red Hat!

I have a stock Red Hat Enterprise Linux system and, for the life of me, I
cannot compile ipsec-tools-0.4.

When compile "isakmp.c"...
.... in include "../include_glibc/linux/udp.h"
.... it says: "net/sock.h: no such file or directory"

I have done an absolutely ordinary "./configure" followed by "make."

I would be just-as-happy if I could find an 'rpm' for this without paying
for it. But I =desperately= need to get online with this version of
racoon!

Sundial Services wrote:

> I have a stock Red Hat Enterprise Linux system and, for the life of me, I
> cannot compile ipsec-tools-0.4.
>
> When compile "isakmp.c"...
> ... in include "../include_glibc/linux/udp.h"
> ... it says: "net/sock.h: no such file or directory"
>
> I have done an absolutely ordinary "./configure" followed by "make."
>
> I would be just-as-happy if I could find an 'rpm' for this without paying
> for it. But I =desperately= need to get online with this version of
> racoon!

This is a dependency problem. It won't compile so long as "net/sock.h"
isn't on your system. In my Mandrake system, net/sock.h is put there by
kernel-source. Install the source for your kernel.

In general terms, the RPM system seems to split packages into the main
package and the "devel" package. Any missing header file (ones that end in
..h) is most often in the devel package. A program to be installed from source
usually requires them to be present. This one is a little bit different,
in that the package you need doesn't have a name like "net-devel". The
Mandrake package installer allows me to search for the package containing
net/sock.h I don't know what installers RH has.

HTH,

Doug.
--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Always go to other people's funerals, otherwise they won't come to yours.
- Yogi Berra.

Doug Laidlaw wrote:
> This is a dependency problem. It won't compile so long as "net/sock.h"
> isn't on your system. In my Mandrake system, net/sock.h is put there by
> kernel-source. Install the source for your kernel.

Kernel source -is- here.
sock.h is in "/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/net/sock.h"

> In general terms, the RPM system seems to split packages into the main
> package and the "devel" package. Any missing header file (ones that end
> in
> .h) is most often in the devel package. A program to be installed from
> source
> usually requires them to be present. This one is a little bit different,
> in that the package you need doesn't have a name like "net-devel". The
> Mandrake package installer allows me to search for the package containing
> net/sock.h I don't know what installers RH has.

I downloaded ipsec-tools-4.0 straight from SourceForge and went from there.
Red Hat's rpms definitely don't have the 4.0 ipsec-tools. I need the
nat-traversal functionality, so I am trying to compile straight from
source.

Sundial Services wrote:

> Doug Laidlaw wrote:
>> This is a dependency problem. It won't compile so long as "net/sock.h"
>> isn't on your system. In my Mandrake system, net/sock.h is put there by
>> kernel-source. Install the source for your kernel.
>
> Kernel source -is- here.
> sock.h is in "/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/net/sock.h"
>
>> In general terms, the RPM system seems to split packages into the main
>> package and the "devel" package. Any missing header file (ones that end
>> in
>> .h) is most often in the devel package. A program to be installed from
>> source
>> usually requires them to be present. This one is a little bit different,
>> in that the package you need doesn't have a name like "net-devel". The
>> Mandrake package installer allows me to search for the package containing
>> net/sock.h I don't know what installers RH has.
>
> I downloaded ipsec-tools-4.0 straight from SourceForge and went from
> there.
> Red Hat's rpms definitely don't have the 4.0 ipsec-tools. I need the
> nat-traversal functionality, so I am trying to compile straight from
> source.
>
O.K. so you have kernel-source, but ipsec-tools can't find it? That is
rather odd. Your sock.h is just where I would expect it to be. This is
unfortunately beyond my ability. If I was faced with that, I would look at
config.log, to see if there is any clue there. I tried compiling the
package just to try and reproduce the error, but I already have a
conflicting version of ipsec-tools installed. I suggest that you post any
lines from config.log that seem relevant, and let the "big guns" have a go
at it.

Doug.

P.S. I have two kernels installed and source for only one. It is a long
shot, but perhaps your position is the same.
--
ICQ Number 178748389. Registered Linux User No. 277548.
Remember when life's path is steep to keep your mind even.
- Horace (65-8 B.C.)

> > This is a dependency problem. It won't compile so long as "net/sock.h"
> > isn't on your system. In my Mandrake system, net/sock.h is put there by
> > kernel-source. Install the source for your kernel.
>
> Kernel source -is- here.
> sock.h is in "/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/net/sock.h"

Yes, but how is it supposed to know to look there? Chances are that if it
were in /usr/src/linux/include/net, things would work out. Assuming you
don't already have a /usr/src/linux, try "ln -s /usr/src/linux-2.4
/usr/src/linux", and see if that makes it better.

steve

Steve Wolfe wrote:
>> Kernel source -is- here.
>> sock.h is in "/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/net/sock.h"
>
> Yes, but how is it supposed to know to look there? Chances are that if
> it
> were in /usr/src/linux/include/net, things would work out. Assuming you
> don't already have a /usr/src/linux, try "ln -s /usr/src/linux-2.4
> /usr/src/linux", and see if that makes it better.

Well, I'm just doing configure/make. I briefly looked at the Makefile to
see if I could edit the '-I' clauses in gcc, but ... what keeps bugging me
here is "this stuff is supposed to work." I must be doing something stupid
or trying something against the wrong version of something-else. Is that a
valid assumption, or is compiling/installing stuff in Linux harder than I
thought it would be?

I got a /slew/ of weird errors when I tried to point at the Linux includes.
And like I said, I'm reluctant to start "throwing things at" this problem
if I'm just doin' something dumb here. For instance, /is/ this a
compatible kernel? It's got an 0.2 or 0.3 version of ipsec-tools installed
as a package...

And can I maybe circumvent the problem entirely by finding the right
executables already-compiled? I gotta get _results_ here, and "damm fast."

I have plunged into the "src/racoon/Makefile" that was generated by
Configure... hoping to make something work.

I cleaned it up to:
[snip!]
CPPFLAGS= -I /usr/include -I/usr/src/linux-2.4/include
CPPFLAGS+= -I./../include-glibc -I../include-glibc -include
../../include-glibc/glibc-bugs.h
CPPFLAGS+= -DINET6 -DIPV6_INRIA_VERSION -I./missing
OPTFLAG=-Wall -Werror -Wno-unused -DYIPS_DEBUG
CFLAGS= -g -O2 $(CPPFLAGS) -DHAVE_CONFIG_H $(OPTFLAG) -DIPSEC -I.
-I$(srcdir)
CFLAGS+= -DSYSCONFDIR=\"${sysconfdir}\" -Wno-sign-compare
CFLAGS+=-DYY_NO_UNPUT
CFLAGS+=-I${srcdir}/../libipsec
[/snip!]

Then compile says:
[snip!]
gcc -g -O2 -I /usr/include -I/usr/src/linux-2.4/include -I./../include-glibc
-I../include-glibc -include ./../include-glibc/glibc-bugs.h -DINET6
-DIPV6_INRIA_VERSION -I./missing -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -Wall -Werror -Wno-unused
-DYIPS_DEBUG -DIPSEC -I. -I. -DSYSCONFDIR=\"/usr/local/etc\"
-Wno-sign-compare -DYY_NO_UNPUT -I./../libipsec -c isakmp.c
In file included from /usr/src/linux-2.4/include/net/sock.h:37,
from /usr/src/linux-2.4/include/linux/udp.h:21,
from isakmp.c:97:
/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/linux/timer.h:11: field `entry' has incomplete
type
/usr/src/linux-2.4/include/linux/timer.h:19: confused by earlier errors,
bailing out
make: *** [isakmp.o] Error 1
[/snip!]

{ Obviously, "[snip!]" and "[/snip!]" are my doing for this message, marking
the beginning and end of literal code in the message... not something that
was actually in the output. }

And the "timer.h" code is:
[snip!]
#ifndef _LINUX_TIMER_H
#define _LINUX_TIMER_H

#include <linux/config.h>
#include <linux/list.h>
#include <linux/spinlock.h>

struct tvec_t_base_s;

struct timer_list {
struct list_head entry; <=== line 11
unsigned long expires;
....
[/snip!]

Please don't give up on me folks... thanks for your continued help.

> Well, I'm just doing configure/make. I briefly looked at the Makefile to
> see if I could edit the '-I' clauses in gcc, but ... what keeps bugging me
> here is "this stuff is supposed to work." I must be doing something
stupid
> or trying something against the wrong version of something-else. Is that
a
> valid assumption, or is compiling/installing stuff in Linux harder than I
> thought it would be?

Things usually aren't that bad, not in my opinion. You seem to have
picked one of the more finicky packages. : ) That being said, having
/usr/src/linux a symlink to the actual kernel sources is relatively common.

> I got a /slew/ of weird errors when I tried to point at the Linux
includes.
> And like I said, I'm reluctant to start "throwing things at" this problem
> if I'm just doin' something dumb here. For instance, /is/ this a
> compatible kernel? It's got an 0.2 or 0.3 version of ipsec-tools
installed
> as a package...

You'd probably be best served asking that on the ipsec mailing list, if
there is one.

> And can I maybe circumvent the problem entirely by finding the right
> executables already-compiled? I gotta get _results_ here, and "damm
fast."

You probably can!

steve

Sundial Services wrote:
> Well, I'm just doing configure/make. I briefly looked at the Makefile to
> see if I could edit the '-I' clauses in gcc

For configure:

<quote>
CPPFLAGS C/C++ preprocessor flags, e.g. -I<include dir> if you have
headers in a nonstandard directory <include dir>
</quote>

ipsec-tools-0.4 src also supports --with-kernel-headers option, it seems.

If you're using bash, for example,

CPPFLAGS="-I/usr/src/linux/include" configure

It should be incorporated into the makefiles for you.


> but ... what keeps bugging me
> here is "this stuff is supposed to work." I must be doing something
> stupid
> or trying something against the wrong version of something-else. Is that
> a valid assumption, or is compiling/installing stuff in Linux harder than
> I thought it would be?

Not if you're doing it by hand. After I realized that I was starting to
create my own distro (well, not really) just trying to compile a few
programs in Mandrake, I decided to move away from the binary-only model. I
used to have to rewrite the source code a little, as well, just to get it
to compile.

> I got a /slew/ of weird errors when I tried to point at the Linux
> includes. And like I said, I'm reluctant to start "throwing things at"
> this problem

Want to post a few of them? Like the first few, particularly the ones that
refer to errors about conflicting header definitions, missing files? Etc?

> if I'm just doin' something dumb here. For instance, /is/ this a
> compatible kernel? It's got an 0.2 or 0.3 version of ipsec-tools
> installed as a package...

0.4 ipsec-tools README says: "This package provides a way to use the native
IPsec functionality in the Linux 2.6+ kernel."


Jon.

-- * Does the walker choose the path, or does the path choose the walker?
(fr. Sabriel) * --

Sorry, didn't see your more recent post!


Jon.

-- * Does the walker choose the path, or does the path choose the walker?
(fr. Sabriel) * --