Re-2: [Openswan Users] Installing Openswan 2.3.0 on Suse 9.1

[Paul Wouters]

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 t.henneberger at hcs-computer.de wrote:

> Here are the errors I get when building the rpm:
>
>  suse:/usr/src/packages/SPECS # rpmbuild ipsec-tools.spec
>  error: Failed build dependencies:
>        bison is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        cvs is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        flex is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        gdbm-devel is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        libzio is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        m4 is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        make is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        ncurses-devel is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        rcs is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        texinfo is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        zlib-devel is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        autoconf is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        automake is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        gettext is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        kernel-source is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        libtool is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        openssl-devel is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0
>        readline-devel is needed by ipsec-tools-0.5-0

You will have to install those packages. They are valid dependancies.
It provides for various .h files you need.

> Here are the errors I get when trying to make install:
>
>  suse:/usr/src/packages/SRPMS/ipsec-tools-0.5 # ./configure
>  .
>  .
>  .
>  checking for /lib/modules/2.6.4-52-default/build/include/linux/pfkeyv2.h... no
>  checking for /usr/src/linux/include/linux/pfkeyv2.h... no
>  configure: error: Unable to find linux-2.6 kernel headers. Aborting.

I guess you can make a link of /usr/src/linux to your /lib/modules/`uname -a`/build link.

>>> The newest ipsec-tools for Suse (as rpm) are 0.3, but I don't want to use
>>> such an
>>> old version (x.509 security problem). I found the 0.5 version on the ipsec-
>>> tools homepage,

Btw. Since openswan only uses setkey from the ipsec-tools package, you can
safely delete racoon, the binary with the x509 problems. We dont use it, so
it should not be a security risk.

Paul