[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: installing oracle 9i



On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 08:26:43PM -0700, Jason Majors wrote:
> > Uh, what?  bash is a bourne shell (and then some).  ash is probably a
> > more "pure" bourne shell; it's not clear to me whether it strives more
> > for bourne or POSIX compliance.  Who told you debian didn't have a
> > bourne shell?  I'd request that they reach between their legs, grasp
> > their neck firmly and pull hard ... they just _might_ pull their head
> > out of their ass.
> Oracle support says it must be the bourne shell, not the bourne again
> shell.
> Most likely an excuse to put the pressure on somebody else, but that's
> what their tech said.
> 
I installed oracle 8.1.7 on linux about a year ago.  I don't know
if 9i is any better (I suspect not).  I had to use ash for /bin/sh
and I had to have awk installed and it had to be /bin/awk.  Think
I used gawk but I can't remember now (I've slept since then).  The
install was via the java install tool oracle has but it calls other
stuff.  The computer I installed it on was a p5-133 with 128 Mb ram.
It didn't run too well.  The sample database took 96Mb memory.  I can
use sqlplus and such and it works ok as a client...

jim


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: