Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Philip Tricca]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2445 bytes --]

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 08:37:36PM +0000, Scheie, Peter M wrote:
> I'm trying to build tpm2-tools with bitbake, but it fails saying it cannot find sapi ("Package requirements (sapi >- 1.3.0 sapi < 2.0.0) were not met") which is provided by tpm2-tss (right?).  Tpm2-tss builds just fine, and when I try to build tpm2-tools, I can see tpm2-tss being built since it's listed as a dependency in the recipe.  But something breaks somewhere.

This is bitrot: I've been neglecting these recipes for a while now.
They're a personal project, not on my Intel time. Still, Trevor has
been proding me along with some very helpful patches. We've got a
'rocko' branch where we're refreshing versions and accounting for
minor changes in the upstream build.

I think the TSS2 libraries and the daemon should now be building the
latest release but I haven't done the tools yet. This could be part of
what you're running into.

> I should add that I'm not using the git clone of tpm2-tools, but rather the tar file from releases.  For my recipe, I've modified tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb so that it points to the tar file rather than the github repo, and renamed it tpm2-tools_3.0.3.bb.  Working through this, I'm confused by several things:
> 
> *         Why is the recipe version 2.1.0 on the OpenEmbedded.org website when the latest tar file is 3.0.3?

See above. Also: https://github.com/flihp/meta-measured/pulls/

> 
> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?

I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of
one component at some point and the build required different
work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better the
version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have come
out. Eventually they may go away completely ...

> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

No clue. The right thing to do is to update the recipe to the latest and
go from there.

Philip

> As I said, I've modified the recipe files to use the 3.0.3 tar file for the SRC_URI, but I suspect something else is not quite right perhaps because of how I'm mixing versions of tar files and recipes (even though I've removed all references to the 2.1.0 version) and causing the sapi error.  Ideas?

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Scheie, Peter M]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5119 bytes --]

Hi Philip,
I switched to the rocko branch and now tpm2-tss and tpm2-abrmd build without errors, so thanks for that.  For tpm2-tools, the patch referenced in the recipe doesn't seem necessary any more (right?) so I've removed it from the recipe for now.  Next I've got to get our OpenSSL package updated, as WRL8 provides 1.0.2d and tpm2-tools says it needs 1.0.2g (we're actually going to 1.0.2h because another package needs that, but that's all the responsibility of another fellow in my group).  Thanks for your help.

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Philip Tricca [mailto:flihp(a)twobit.us] 
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 11:05 PM
To: Scheie, Peter M
Cc: Javier Martinez Canillas; tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

Hi Peter,

On 02/21/2018 12:38 PM, Scheie, Peter M wrote:
> I noticed that Version: in sapi.pc has no value assigned to it, so I think that's why tpm2-tools is failing to build.  IOW, the root of the problem is that tpm2-tss is not setting the Version when it creates sapi.pc when I build with bitbake (it does set it when I run ./configure, make, make install myself).  Tpm2-tss's configure contains a "PACKAGE_VERSION='1.3.0' line so I'm not sure why sapi.pc isn't getting that value assigned.

I've been bringing these recipes up to date on a branch named 'rocko'.
This corresponds to the current OE / Yocto release. The branch is here:

https://github.com/flihp/meta-measured/commits/rocko

I've already addressed the issue you've run into here:

https://github.com/flihp/meta-measured/commit/a11f6da298cb0f2c4fcbd14855b8b508e91456b8

Philip

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scheie, Peter M
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:19 AM
> To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; 'Philip Tricca'
> Cc: 'tpm2(a)lists.01.org'
> Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though 
> tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> I should add that I'm having the same problem as reported in Issue 764 on github (https://github.com/tpm2-software/tpm2-tools/issues/764).  In my case, I *am* using the release tarball.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scheie, Peter M
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:28 AM
> To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; Philip Tricca
> Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though 
> tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> Thanks for the explanations.
> 
> I notice that if I just run ./configure in tpm2-tools-3.0.3, I get a similar error to when I try to run bitbake, that it can't find SAPI.  With ./configure, I can solve this by setting PGK_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig, as that's where 'make install' for tpm2-tss puts the pkgconfig/ directory by default.  How do I do that with bitbake?  That is, how do I specify in my recipe for tpm2-tools the location of pkgconfig as set by the tpm2-tss build/recipe?
> 
> Peter
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Javier Martinez Canillas [mailto:javierm(a)redhat.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:34 PM
> To: Philip Tricca; Scheie, Peter M
> Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though 
> tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
>>>
>>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
>>
>> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions 
>> of one component at some point and the build required different 
>> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better 
>> the version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have 
>> come out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>>
> 
> I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.
> 
>>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?
> 
> SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add patches on the BitBake recipes.
> 
> That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict on fall-throughs for switch case statements.
> 
> About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which 
> version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has 
> SRCREV set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the 
> SHA-1 for
> 2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.
> 
> Best regards,
> --
> Javier Martinez Canillas
> Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat 
> _______________________________________________
> tpm2 mailing list
> tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/tpm2
> 

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Philip Tricca]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4274 bytes --]

Hi Peter,

On 02/21/2018 12:38 PM, Scheie, Peter M wrote:
> I noticed that Version: in sapi.pc has no value assigned to it, so I think that's why tpm2-tools is failing to build.  IOW, the root of the problem is that tpm2-tss is not setting the Version when it creates sapi.pc when I build with bitbake (it does set it when I run ./configure, make, make install myself).  Tpm2-tss's configure contains a "PACKAGE_VERSION='1.3.0' line so I'm not sure why sapi.pc isn't getting that value assigned.

I've been bringing these recipes up to date on a branch named 'rocko'.
This corresponds to the current OE / Yocto release. The branch is here:

https://github.com/flihp/meta-measured/commits/rocko

I've already addressed the issue you've run into here:

https://github.com/flihp/meta-measured/commit/a11f6da298cb0f2c4fcbd14855b8b508e91456b8

Philip

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scheie, Peter M 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:19 AM
> To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; 'Philip Tricca'
> Cc: 'tpm2(a)lists.01.org'
> Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> I should add that I'm having the same problem as reported in Issue 764 on github (https://github.com/tpm2-software/tpm2-tools/issues/764).  In my case, I *am* using the release tarball.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scheie, Peter M 
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:28 AM
> To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; Philip Tricca
> Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> Thanks for the explanations.
> 
> I notice that if I just run ./configure in tpm2-tools-3.0.3, I get a similar error to when I try to run bitbake, that it can't find SAPI.  With ./configure, I can solve this by setting PGK_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig, as that's where 'make install' for tpm2-tss puts the pkgconfig/ directory by default.  How do I do that with bitbake?  That is, how do I specify in my recipe for tpm2-tools the location of pkgconfig as set by the tpm2-tss build/recipe?
> 
> Peter
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Javier Martinez Canillas [mailto:javierm(a)redhat.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:34 PM
> To: Philip Tricca; Scheie, Peter M
> Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine
> 
> 
> [snip]
> 
>>>
>>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
>>
>> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of 
>> one component at some point and the build required different 
>> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better 
>> the version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have 
>> come out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>>
> 
> I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.
> 
>>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?
> 
> SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add patches on the BitBake recipes.
> 
> That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict on fall-throughs for switch case statements.
> 
> About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has SRCREV set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the SHA-1 for
> 2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.
> 
> Best regards,
> --
> Javier Martinez Canillas
> Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat
> _______________________________________________
> tpm2 mailing list
> tpm2(a)lists.01.org
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/tpm2
> 

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Scheie, Peter M]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3602 bytes --]

I noticed that Version: in sapi.pc has no value assigned to it, so I think that's why tpm2-tools is failing to build.  IOW, the root of the problem is that tpm2-tss is not setting the Version when it creates sapi.pc when I build with bitbake (it does set it when I run ./configure, make, make install myself).  Tpm2-tss's configure contains a "PACKAGE_VERSION='1.3.0' line so I'm not sure why sapi.pc isn't getting that value assigned.


-----Original Message-----
From: Scheie, Peter M 
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 10:19 AM
To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; 'Philip Tricca'
Cc: 'tpm2(a)lists.01.org'
Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

I should add that I'm having the same problem as reported in Issue 764 on github (https://github.com/tpm2-software/tpm2-tools/issues/764).  In my case, I *am* using the release tarball.

-----Original Message-----
From: Scheie, Peter M 
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:28 AM
To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; Philip Tricca
Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

Thanks for the explanations.

I notice that if I just run ./configure in tpm2-tools-3.0.3, I get a similar error to when I try to run bitbake, that it can't find SAPI.  With ./configure, I can solve this by setting PGK_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig, as that's where 'make install' for tpm2-tss puts the pkgconfig/ directory by default.  How do I do that with bitbake?  That is, how do I specify in my recipe for tpm2-tools the location of pkgconfig as set by the tpm2-tss build/recipe?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Javier Martinez Canillas [mailto:javierm(a)redhat.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:34 PM
To: Philip Tricca; Scheie, Peter M
Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine


[snip]

>>
>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
> 
> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of 
> one component at some point and the build required different 
> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better 
> the version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have 
> come out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>

I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.

>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add patches on the BitBake recipes.

That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict on fall-throughs for switch case statements.

About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has SRCREV set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the SHA-1 for
2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.

Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Scheie, Peter M]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2893 bytes --]

I should add that I'm having the same problem as reported in Issue 764 on github (https://github.com/tpm2-software/tpm2-tools/issues/764).  In my case, I *am* using the release tarball.

-----Original Message-----
From: Scheie, Peter M 
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2018 8:28 AM
To: 'Javier Martinez Canillas'; Philip Tricca
Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: RE: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

Thanks for the explanations.

I notice that if I just run ./configure in tpm2-tools-3.0.3, I get a similar error to when I try to run bitbake, that it can't find SAPI.  With ./configure, I can solve this by setting PGK_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig, as that's where 'make install' for tpm2-tss puts the pkgconfig/ directory by default.  How do I do that with bitbake?  That is, how do I specify in my recipe for tpm2-tools the location of pkgconfig as set by the tpm2-tss build/recipe?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Javier Martinez Canillas [mailto:javierm(a)redhat.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:34 PM
To: Philip Tricca; Scheie, Peter M
Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine


[snip]

>>
>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
> 
> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of 
> one component at some point and the build required different 
> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better 
> the version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have 
> come out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>

I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.

>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add patches on the BitBake recipes.

That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict on fall-throughs for switch case statements.

About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has SRCREV set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the SHA-1 for
2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.

Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Scheie, Peter M]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2441 bytes --]

Thanks for the explanations.

I notice that if I just run ./configure in tpm2-tools-3.0.3, I get a similar error to when I try to run bitbake, that it can't find SAPI.  With ./configure, I can solve this by setting PGK_CONFIG_PATH=/usr/local/lib/pkgconfig, as that's where 'make install' for tpm2-tss puts the pkgconfig/ directory by default.  How do I do that with bitbake?  That is, how do I specify in my recipe for tpm2-tools the location of pkgconfig as set by the tpm2-tss build/recipe?

Peter

-----Original Message-----
From: Javier Martinez Canillas [mailto:javierm(a)redhat.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2018 5:34 PM
To: Philip Tricca; Scheie, Peter M
Cc: tpm2(a)lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine


[snip]

>>
>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
> 
> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of 
> one component at some point and the build required different 
> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better 
> the version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have 
> come out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>

I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.

>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add patches on the BitBake recipes.

That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict on fall-throughs for switch case statements.

About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has SRCREV set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the SHA-1 for
2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.

Best regards,
--
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement Red Hat

Re: [tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Javier Martinez Canillas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1651 bytes --]


[snip]

>>
>> *          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?
> 
> I don't remember. I think I was trying to support multiple versions of
> one component at some point and the build required different
> work-arounds in the bitbake metadata. As the build has gotten better the
> version specific files (*.bb) have shrunk as the workarounds have come
> out. Eventually they may go away completely ...
>

I'm not a BitBake & OpenEmbedded expert, but AFAIR what you do is pretty
common. That way you could for example develop / test against the latest
git snapshot but also provide a stable release so people can switch them
setting a PREFERRED_VERSION for the recipe in an image or machine config.

>> *         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

SRC_URI in tpm2-tools.inc is set to the tpm2.0-tools.git repo, but then
the tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb adds to the SRC_URI a patch. That's how you add
patches on the BitBake recipes.

That patch was to allow building with GCC7, since it got much more strict
on fall-throughs for switch case statements.

About the main.c not being in the tarball, it really depends on which
version of the recipe you are using. The tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb has SRCREV
set to 27d34a61cb947780ab58508dfea70e696cff185c, which is the SHA-1 for
2.1.0 tag so it should be there when using that version of the recipe.

Best regards,
-- 
Javier Martinez Canillas
Software Engineer - Desktop Hardware Enablement
Red Hat

[tpm2] building tpm2-tools with bitbake fails even though tpm2-tss builds fine

[Scheie, Peter M]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1386 bytes --]

I'm trying to build tpm2-tools with bitbake, but it fails saying it cannot find sapi ("Package requirements (sapi >- 1.3.0 sapi < 2.0.0) were not met") which is provided by tpm2-tss (right?).  Tpm2-tss builds just fine, and when I try to build tpm2-tools, I can see tpm2-tss being built since it's listed as a dependency in the recipe.  But something breaks somewhere.

I should add that I'm not using the git clone of tpm2-tools, but rather the tar file from releases.  For my recipe, I've modified tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb so that it points to the tar file rather than the github repo, and renamed it tpm2-tools_3.0.3.bb.  Working through this, I'm confused by several things:

*         Why is the recipe version 2.1.0 on the OpenEmbedded.org website when the latest tar file is 3.0.3?

*          Why is the recipe made up of two files, tpm2-tools_2.1.0.bb and tpm2-tools.inc instead  of just putting it all in the .bb file?

*         Why does the SRC_URI in the .bb file point to gcc7.diff which references, among others, a main.c file that isn't in the tar file?

As I said, I've modified the recipe files to use the 3.0.3 tar file for the SRC_URI, but I suspect something else is not quite right perhaps because of how I'm mixing versions of tar files and recipes (even though I've removed all references to the 2.1.0 version) and causing the sapi error.  Ideas?

Peter

[-- Attachment #2: attachment.html --]
[-- Type: text/html, Size: 6716 bytes --]