Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.misc -> /usr/i386glibc and linux and mandrake 9.1

/usr/i386glibc and linux and mandrake 9.1

From: Jerry <weinstei_at_nova.edu>
Date: 30 Jun 2003 19:56:41 -0700
Message-ID: <69fca47c.0306301856.4dcd6447@posting.google.com>


hope this can be answered here, so here goes.  

 Upon installing oracle enterprise edition 8i  onto Mandrake 9.1, I may have stopped prematurely and  as a result gotten into this pickle.  

 Specifically, I downloaded 8i from Oracle's website, uncompressed it, installed it, and am now following
 a credible install guide.  

 The part I am stuck with is editing the .bash_profile file.  I think I may not have downloaded a patch for this.  

 I edited the .bash_profile exactly and then ran from root the  source
 command and the following error resulted.....  

 bash: /usr/i386-glibc21-linux/bin/i386-glibc-linux-env.sh: No such file or directory
 bash: echo.bashrc_profile executed: command not found  bash: TMOUT: readonly variable    

 I know a couple things about this.  

  1. there is NO directory /usr/i386...... let alone the shell script missing.
  2. the reason the second error popped up is that the first error was discovered.

 I did some picking through the tree and found on Mankdrake there IS a i586 directory as shown by the following files found...  

/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-mandrake-linux-gnu
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-mandrake-linux-gnu/3.2.2
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-mandrake-linux-gnu/3.2.2/tradcpp0
/usr/lib/gcc-lib/i586-mandrake-linux-gnu/3.2.2/cpp0
/usr/lib/rpm/i586-mandrake-linux
/usr/lib/rpm/i586-mandrake-linux/macros
/usr/lib/rpm/i586-linux
/usr/local/jdk118_v3/bin/i586
/usr/local/jdk118_v3/lib/i586
/usr/src/RPM/RPMS/i586
   

 My problem is, I can't tell whether or not the version of this Oracle app (v8.1.7) really needs the i386glibc shell script or if there is an new i586 one or if I just needed to download and install the patch.  

 Hope this is not too much of a handful. Probably not.  

 Thanks for any assistance. Received on Mon Jun 30 2003 - 21:56:41 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US