From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Michael Tremer <michael.tremer@ipfire.org>
To: development@lists.ipfire.org
Subject: Re: ClamAV 0.104.0 Release Candidate
Date: Wed, 04 Aug 2021 16:27:00 +0200
Message-ID: <5F84F95F-40AD-4881-8EFE-F24139309573@ipfire.org>
In-Reply-To: <15fea4ed-1eeb-58f2-e070-2dc285d87da5@ipfire.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============3161682280462932081=="
List-Id: <development.lists.ipfire.org>

--===============3161682280462932081==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Hello,

It looks like stdbool.h isn=E2=80=99t included in those files.

But what does clamav have to do with frr?

-Michael

> On 31 Jul 2021, at 10:04, Matthias Fischer <matthias.fischer(a)ipfire.org> =
wrote:
>=20
> Hi,
>=20
> ClamAV will be updated to 0.104.0 in the next "about two or four weeks",
> see:
>=20
> https://blog.clamav.net/2021/07/clamav-01040-release-candidate-is-here.html
>=20
> To be prepared, I tried "to verify that [you] 0.104.0 can [be] build and
> run in your environment".
>=20
> Interesting problem, because "As of ClamAV 0.104, CMake is required to
> build ClamAV."
>=20
> So first I tried to find out which 'cmake' commands are needed to build
> 0.104.0 the same way as 0.103 (hopefully) and started building, based on
> Core 158.
>=20
> But I always got the following errors from 'frr 6.0', no chance:
>=20
> ***SNIP***
> frr (6.0)
>                           [       19 ][ FAIL ]
>=20
>    5405 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c: In function 'show_ip_ospf_database_max':
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c:6288:17: error: 'FALSE' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
>    6288 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c: In function 'show_ip_ospf_instance_database':
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c:6345:17: error: 'FALSE' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
>    6345 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c: In function
> 'show_ip_ospf_instance_database_type_adv_router':
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c:6495:17: error: 'FALSE' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
>    6495 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c: In function 'show_ip_ospf_border_routers':
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c:9263:17: error: 'FALSE' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
>    9263 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c: In function 'show_ip_ospf_route':
>    ospfd/ospf_vty.c:9389:17: error: 'FALSE' undeclared (first use in
> this function)
>    9389 |  bool all_vrf =3D FALSE;
>    |                 ^~~~~
>    make[3]: *** [Makefile:3951: ospfd/ospf_vty.o] Error 1
>    make[3]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
>    make[3]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/frr-6.0'
>    make[2]: *** [Makefile:4627: all-recursive] Error 1
>    make[2]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/frr-6.0'
>    make[1]: *** [Makefile:2047: all] Error 2
>    make[1]: Leaving directory '/usr/src/frr-6.0'
>    make: *** [frr:84: /usr/src/log/frr-6.0] Error 2
> ***SNAP**
>=20
> Then I tried with current 'next / Core 159' (25.7.2021) and build went
> through. No errors.
>=20
> Questions and thoughts:
>=20
> - Could "someone" please check my 'cmake' changes - are they ok this
> way? Please see attached lfs and rootfile for 0.104.0.
>=20
> - I couldn't test with arm so I disabled this lfs part for now:
> ***SNIP***
> #ifeq "$(BUILD_PLATFORM)" "arm"
> #CONFIGURE_FLAGS =3D --disable-fanotify
> #endif
> #
> ***SNAP***
>=20
> - When do we plan to ship Core 159? If the final ClamAV 0.104.0 comes
> out, I would like to update ClamaV as soon as possible, but at the
> moment, I have no clue how to build 0.104.0 with Core 158 and 'frr 6.0'.

Good question. It has a kernel, so it could cause us a huge headache, but so =
far it looks good.

I hope for a release in mid August.

> - They're planning (starting with 0.103 or 0.104.0? as) a LTS feature
> release:
> =3D> https://lists.clamav.net/pipermail/clamav-users/2021-July/011676.html
>=20
> What do we think of this...? ;-)

LTS versions are always good, but I do not mind being on mainline.

-Michael

>=20
> Best,
> Matthias
> <lfs_clamav.txt><config_rootfiles_packages_clamav.txt>


--===============3161682280462932081==--