Re: Oracle 9i on Redhat 9: no go??

"Kenneth A Kauffman" <kkauffman_at_nospam.headfog.com> wrote in message news:<uhioa.287893$0g4.7895630_at_news2.east.cox.net>...

You can get it installed - but you'll have to look up each error during the install and deal with it like everybody else.

My 2c is this: I really dislike Windows servers, but you have to admit - there's a whole lot less hastle when installing something like Ora. On the other hand, with Unix you basically have to COMPILE AND LINK the whole dang package. I think this is acient, archiac technology that's just got to go. For some reason, we've never been able to get around these methods (other than some binary rpms etc).

This means that your entire working environment in Unix must exactly match the machine upon which generated the setup/install package. This balance is almost always a mis-match, and you'll run around patching one required package, back-dating another one, updating another. I think I went through 8 or 9 "patches" on my RH Application Server - which is an Oracle certified platform unlike RH9.  I got 9iDB installed on RH9 with increased efforts.

The joy is that once you've paid your dues, Linux just can't be beat for performance and reliability. Under the same hardware, RH-AS will run circles around any version of Window servers, including NT, 2k and even XP Pro.

So, to hopefully make my life a bit less troublsome I invested in RH App Server as it was certified from Oracle. But even the latest Oracle and RH-AS paired together will not install without a lot of intervention. Who do I blame? I'd have to give this one to Oracle Engineering. WAY too much compiling, WAY too much linking, WAY too much reliance on micro-specific versions of Java.

I also got 9iAS installed on RedHat AS, with the usual headaches. I've been working on Collaboration Suite for 2 days, but I'll eventually get it also. But I often wonder - how is Larry Ellison gonna take over the world like he claims, when version 9 of his base s/w gives even the most seasoned Unix propeller heads a hard time?

BTW - Solaris 9 and Ora 9DB went a good deal smoother than any Linux, then again 1GB of RAM on a Solaris box is $3000.00 vs $75.00 for Intel...

> "Pasc" <nospam_at_xs4all.nl> wrote in message
> news:3ea134df$0$154$e4fe514c_at_dreader8.news.xs4all.nl...
> > Tried to install Oracle 9i on a fresh Redhat 9 install but to no avail..
> the
> > installation generates an error "Error in invoking target install of
> > makefile ins_oemagent.mk"
> >
> > Tried to run the makefile independantly..but no success either.. make -f
> > ins_oemagent.mk install results in error stating that __ctype_b cannot be
> > found.. and this seems to relate to a uncompatible glibc file ..
> >
> > any help?
> >
> > thanks
> >
> > Pasc
> >
> >
>
> RedHat 9 switched to NPTL threads and their associated tools have also
> (binutils/gcc). This can cause some problem when compiling ANY package. I
> have had some issues with RH8 also. The most reliable builds I get are from
> 7.3 and SuSE. Keep in mind that SuSE is the core of UnitedLinux (even
> though other vendors are part of it), and Oracle is now supported on this
> enterprise offering.
>
> I still use RedHat for my servers, but am seriously considering SuSE as they
> tend to stay more stable and compatible through the upgrade process. Too
> many inconsistencies are arising from RedHat going from version to version.
>
> my 2 cents...
>
> ken k
Received on Sat Apr 19 2003 - 22:53:55 CDT