List Info

Thread: Programmatic manner to determine version?
Programmatic manner to determine version?
country flaguser name
United States		 2007-07-19 18:42:58 

  


  

    





Hello everyone,



 



I’m working on a build system which encompasses dependencies
on OpenLDAP. I’ve done a general of the web with Google, searched the
OpenLDAP FAQ, and searched the OpenLDAP mailing lists for how one can determine

the version of OpenLDAP software.



 



I understand that there are different version numbers for
APIs, software releases, and libraries.



 



However, I’m confused as to how to programmatically
determine the version of installed binaries and libraries and then reconcile

them with 



 



Perhaps this speaks to a lack of experience with the innards
of OpenLDAP or some of the build tools, so I am asking here for some insight.



 



All of my examples are on Novell SuSE Linux 9.2, on ia64
architecture, with a build of OpenLDAP 2.3.36. My goal would be to validate
that OpenLDAP version 2.3.36 tools and libraries are installed.



 



If one tries to deduce the version of a library you would
see this:



    
 
  • > cd lib; ls -l libldap*
    • 
 
      
  
    • libldap-2.3.so.0 ->
      libldap-2.3.so.0.2.24
      • 
  
    • libldap-2.3.so.0.2.24
      • 
  
    • libldap.a
      • 
  
    • libldap.la
      • 
 
    




    
 
  • At best, I can confirm this library
     is from OpenLDAP 2.3.X.
    • 
 
      
  
    • Question: Is there anyway to
      resolve the .X = .36 for this library?
      • 
 
    
 
  • Reading libldap.la gives some
     insight, but nothing more than what I’ve already asserted in the
     previous sentence.
    • 
 
  • Question: What is the .0.2.24
     version suffix? It doesn̵7;t seem to relate to 2.3.36.
    • 




    
 
  • > objdump -x libldap-2.3.so.0
    • 
 
      
  
    • Yeilds a lot of information,
      but again – nothing seems to relate to 2.3.36.
      • 
 
    




 



If one tries parse the output of bin/ldapsearch –V or
libexec/slapd –V, you can see 2.0.36 – but the output seems to go
to the console. I can’t do something like:



    
 
  • libexec/slapd -V | head -n 1 |
     awk '{print $4}'" > /tmp/openldap_version.txt
    • 
 
      
  
    • /tmp/openldap_version.txt is blank.
      • 
 
    
 
  • Is there an easy way to pipe
     the output to STDOUT? What am I missing?
    • 




 



Aha! I think I found one method: includes/ldap_features.h reveals:



    
 
  • ldap_features.h:#define
     LDAP_VENDOR_VERSION 20336
    • 
 
  • ldap_features.h:#define
     LDAP_VENDOR_VERSION_PATCH 36
    • 




 



Is this the only way?




 



Thanks for any insight anyone can offer.



…230;……R30;……̷0;……
          



 



Mark
Lavi



Web
Producer




SGI



 



mlavisgi.com



tel:
650.933.7707



sgi.com



 



 



01C7CA23.DE3A0940">



 






  

  
  
   
     
    
 
        Approximate file size 2238 bytes
    

    
    

  

    Re: Programmatic manner to determine
version?
  


  

     country flaguser name
Netherlands		
     2007-07-20 02:33:28
  


  

    
Mark Lavi skrev, on 20-07-2007 01:42:

[...]

> Is this the only way?

Well, "slapd -V 2>&1 | head -n1 | awk -F "
" '{ print $4 }'" works for 
me. Or isn't this what you meant?

--Tonni

-- 
Tony Earnshaw
Email: tonni at hetnet dot nl



  


  

    
  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    Re: Programmatic manner to determine
version?
  


  

     user name

     2007-07-20 05:53:28
  


  

    
On 7/20/07, Tony Earnshaw <tonnihetnet.nl> wrote:
> Mark Lavi skrev, on 20-07-2007 01:42:
>
> [...]
>
> > Is this the only way?
>
> Well, "slapd -V 2>&1 | head -n1 | awk -F
" " '{ print $4 }'" works for
> me. Or isn't this what you meant?

Use something like:
slapd -VV 2>&1|head -n1|awk '{print $4}'

Unless you want a stray slapd running ... (which you may get
with  just -V).

ldapsearch -VV 2>&1|head -n1|awk '{print $5}'

Headers you have, but for libraries ... I'd use my package
management
system (e.g. 'rpm -qf --qf "%n"
/usr/lib64/libldap-2.3.so.0'). You shouldn't have any
software
installed except by your package management system :-P.

Regards,
Buchan



  


  

    
  

  
  
   
     
    






 [1-3]











   
 





about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )