Re: glibc incompatibilities
Adam McKenna <email@example.com> writes:
> On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 04:51:06AM -0500, Greg Stark wrote:
> > I don't imagine there's a workaround for this is there?
> > Why would the symbol version be missing anyways?
> > Unable to load native library: /tmp/OraInstall2002-12-20_04-29-15AM/jre/lib/i386/libjava.so: symbol __libc_wait, version GLIBC_2.0 not defined in file libc.so.6 with link time reference
> OK, sorry, I'm blind.
> If you're trying to install Oracle on a sid system, it's not very likely to
> happen. If you do get it going, I'd be interested in hearing how you did it.
> Oracle will install on a potato system and I believe will continue to work
> once the system has been upgraded to woody. But installing on woody or sid
> is a no-go. If someone knows better than me, then please correct me but this
> has been my experience.
It should work. glibc is supposed to offer run-time backwards compatibility.
Oracle in the past depended on link time compatibility which glibc breaks but
they have a workaround for that for 8i, I'm not sure if it's needed for 9i
> You might want to also check out
Which says about the specific problem I reported:
> > There is also a problem with instalator for oracle 9i - it uses java from=
> > IBM? with known problem that it uses __glibc_wait symbol. In summary -
> > oracle9i is uninstallable on sid ( not a big problem ), and= it can't run
> > with libc2.13 ( BIG problem )
> This problem will be fixed in -6, I think.
Ah, thanks. I'm still on -5 which is the most recent I see, I guess it'll be