| To: | fam@xxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: fam error "failed to accept new client" |
| From: | Joel Baxter <jbaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sun, 18 May 2003 18:56:37 -0700 |
| In-reply-to: | <200305191036.17936.michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <3EC80F8E.900@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3EC81C5E.70704@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200305191036.17936.michael.wardle@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | jbaxter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | fam-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030304 |
Thanks for the response. Just to finish this off: it was indeed the
xinetd version that was the culprit. I now have FAM running OK as built
from the 2.6.7 source RPM.
In fact using the binary RPM turned out to be a problem of a different sort. None of the RedHat binary RPMs for FAM include the static library libfam.a, and at least one of the many configure scripts in the Courier IMAP build actually checks for the existence of libfam.a at one point, as part of a does-FAM-exist sequence. (Even though, as far as I can tell, only the dynamic library is actually used by the compile end products.) So that wasn't good. Rather than hacking at the config scripts to make them get the correct answer, I thought I'd try going back to the source builds, so that libfam.a would exist, and all seems to be well. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: fam error "failed to accept new client", Michael Wardle |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: fam error "failed to accept new client", Michael Wardle |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: fam error "failed to accept new client", Michael Wardle |
| Next by Thread: | Re: fam error "failed to accept new client", Michael Wardle |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |