>>On Monday March 1, 2004 Adam Williams <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> >> wrote: >> >> >>>Hi, I know this list is for fedora, but I don't know of an enterprise >>> mail list, and I figured some of you out there may run ES 2.1 and >>> could help. I have a server I need to upgrade to kernel 2.6 for >2GB >>> file size for samba file support. I recompiled from redhat 9 source >>> rpms the >>> required things, except binutils, procps, and modutils won't compile >>>with rpmbuild --rebuild, they all error out. So I thought maybe I >>> could >>> just download the RH9 binary rpms and install them, but it errors >>>saying failed dependancies, libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.3) required. RedHat ES >>> 2.1 comes with glibc 2.2.4, so I'm looking for some suggestions how >>> to upgrade these 3 packages so I can upgrade to kernel 2.6. any >>>suggestions? Thanks! >>> >>> > dsavage@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > >> >>Adam, >> >>Is there any particular reason why you cannot upgrade to RHEL/ES v3.0? >> It's not as advanced as Fedora Core, but the difference isn't nearly so >> large as with RHEL/ES v2.1. You'd still have to recompile stuff, but >> maybe not as much. >> >>--Doc Savage >> Fairview Heights, IL > We use a proprietary piece of software called Exlibris Aleph (library > cataloging software) and it uses Oracle 9 for its database. > Unfortunately, Exlibris tells us they only support RH ES 2.1 because > thats what Oracle supports, and what Exlibris's code will compile > against. We originally tried RH9 and even after extensive modification > of their code, they couldn't get it all to compile correctly. Our > server with the large RAID array is this server, and the only server we > have with a large enough RAID array to temporrarilly hold the backups > while they are written to tape. > > Adam, I could be very mistaken here (if so, don't be shy), but I believe Oracle supports RHEL/ES v3.0 as well as v2.1. In fact, I seem to recall a story in the tech trades a few weeks back that said Oracle + RHEL/ES v3 have earned acceptance under the Common Criteria program for U.S. government purchase and use. If it's Exlibris that doesn't support v3.0, though, that's a different situation entirely. I could probably come up with a quick list of a dozen reasons why their code could be v2.1-specific. One that comes almost instantly to mind might be code that's not thread-safe in an NPTL environment. I'm beginning to appreciate your problem. --Doc Savage Fairview Heights, IL
