Skip to main content.
home | support | download

Back to List Archive

Re: unexpected (and bad) results from ./configure

From: SRE <eckert(at)>
Date: Thu Sep 19 2002 - 03:04:11 GMT
At 06:23 PM 9/18/02, Bill Moseley wrote:
>Not sure about that.  When I looked before google had lots of posts about
>that message.

So it's nothing to worry about? It's not from the swish-e source?

>Probably need to set HOME if you are not logged in
>(as in running via a CGI script)

Suggestion: If environment variables are needed, they should
be documented on the installation page. (But the realization
is slowly dawning that "configure" isn't part of swish-e and
errors there won't be debugged on this list - right?)

>>3. does configure presume the right to chown and chgrp ?
>>   (or is "mv" suggesting that I should?) If so, why?
>I see that on other BSD systems.

You see which thing?

At 06:35 PM 9/18/02, Bill Moseley wrote:
>The part about looking it up on goggle was about the "set owner/group"
>messages, not the "invalid operator"

Again, I guess this is a problem in whatever tool generated
the 'configure' script. Sigh. As a programmer, I'm not happy
with ANY warnings during a build. They often point to real
problems and ignoring them just delays finding the error.

>>4. MOST IMPORTANTLY, ./configure seems to have crashed!
>>   (no exit message, the transcript just ends)
>Hum, not sure. I think that's the end.  What's the command are you running?

Just plain old "./configure", nothing more. Normally I expect
a "normal exit" sort of message so you know it didn't crash.

>Is it possible you don't have write access to that directory?

As you guessed, I'm running via a CGI script instead of an
interactive login. The same script creates a directory,
unpacks the tarball, goes into the resulting directory and
runs configure. Ownership isn't a problem, and the protection
is 755 on the directory. Good guess, but doesn't seem to be
the problem.

>Is the web server running suexec so that cgi scripts run as you instead of "nobody"?

The web server is Apache, and it does NOT do any setuid magic.
It runs as its own user (but not "nobody").

>That's what I get:
>config.status: creating Makefile
>mv: Makefile: set owner/group (was: 1357/0): Operation not permitted
>config.status: creating doc/Makefile
>mv: doc/Makefile: set owner/group (was: 1357/0): Operation not permitted
>config.status: creating src/Makefile
>mv: src/Makefile: set owner/group (was: 1357/0): Operation not permitted
>config.status: creating src/acconfig.h
>config.status: src/acconfig.h is unchanged

So the "Operation not permitted" shows up for EVERYONE?
Can anyone else confirm that? Very worrisome if it's universal.

I suppose I'll have to go hack "configure" to find out where this
is happening, but I'm not a /bin/sh person and I'm not eager to
learn. If anyone else has been through this, I'd love to hear
how it turned out!

Received on Thu Sep 19 03:07:50 2002