| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
 |
 | |||
| Oracle FAQ | Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid | |
|
| |||
Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: HELP: Re-start 10g on RH3 Install from scratch
Steve wrote:
> Howard J. Rogers wrote:
>
>> Steve wrote: >> >>> Howard J. Rogers wrote: >>> >>>> robert wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://tinypic.com/uolrn >>>>> >>>>> Image above is the dialog box that is "supposed" to be the FIRST >>>>> install box. >>>>> >>>>> I have gone past this one, ran orainstRoot.sh, and got to this >>>>> screen : http://tinypic.com/uom0m - when I had to abort. >>>>> (env variables in .bashrc not working, .bash_profile - OK, Howard :P ) >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No. It works, as advertised (I presume the screenshots are ripped >>>> from my website?). If your .bashrc doesn't work, then you haven't >>>> done it right. >>>> >>>> If you do things the way the dizwell site describes, *accurately*, I >>>> will *guarantee* things work first time, every time... >>>> >>>> [snip] >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> My findings are at odds to that statement. >> >> >> >> Which statement? That if you do things "the dizwell way" it will work?
Trust me. I did. I was trying to be kind.
>
>> >>> After installing WB3.0 to a Compaq DL-360, and getting it 'up2date', >> >> >> >> And where does it say on Dizwell to up2date anything? (Clue: it >> doesn't. You do a clean WB install, and you install Oracle onto that. >> You up2date afterwards.)
Before you start saying "My findings are at odds with that statement", understand what "that statement" actually consisted of. That if you *follow my advice ACCURATELY* then it works. So follow it, and it will work. Don't follow it, and it won't. Got it?
Don't come here posting that my advice is in error, when it is actually your know-it-all I've-been-doing-this-for-20-years attitude that is in error. (PS, I've been doing this since 1985. That's 19 years. Care to compare penis sizes, too?)
Learn to read. Learn a little humility. Learn to follow advice. And only when you've done all that, do you have the right to post in public that what I've written doesn't work.
> The fact that you
> don't points to a knowledge base heavily biased in the opposite direction.
I'm not the one incapable of installing Oracle correctly and getting it to work. Or did that little gem pass under your radar? Whatever "knowledge base" I have, and whatever direction you think it's pointing in, I can make Oracle work, and you can't (not without applying patches you don't need, at least). Make of that what you will (I make it that it means I know what I'm doing and you don't).
> As your documentation is formatted as questions and answers, let's look
> more closely at the first one, shall we?
>
> 'Q. OK. I’ve actually dug up a spare machine and installed White Box
> Linux on that, rather than a virtual machine. Now... how do I install
> Oracle 10g onto it?'
>
> Now where does that state that I've only got to load the disks, and not
> patch it to current? As it happens, I was running into these problems
> before respin 1 was released, using V.3 fixed.
The instructions are quite clear: you need Respin 1. From the website:
"From the Whiteboxlinux.org website. You’ll need to download the three ISO images for what’s called the “Respin 1” release of version 3 (as of the date of writing, that’s the current release."
Of course, that's on the page you thought you could dispense with. The page which the one you actually bothered to read says:
"If you haven’t read the Virtual Oracle paper discussing these issues, please do so now."
And the instructions DON'T say patch. Therefore, don't patch. It really is quite simple: Read what you're told to read; do what you're told to do; don't invent steps you're not told to invent. Then it works. What about that is so hard, Steve?
> So, if I go to another page in your website, the one that tells me how
> to install an operating system ( which is hardly relevant to me ),
Except that you have errors and I don't. It is highly relevant.
> I'll
> find out that I was attempting to run the wrong version. Maybe that's
> the problem. I'm certainly not going to reinstall everything just to
> check your results.
You don't have to. My results stand. Your failure to make things work does likewise. Follow the instructions, and it will work. Post here that your "findings" are at odds with that statement, and we'll actually find that you can't read, can't follow a hyperlink, can't download the right version, think you're above reading instructions anyway... I could go on.
> I was extremely accurate and specific in the problems I found, quoted
> from the diary I kept at the time. Why not put a block of *exact*
> prerequisites on your install page? Like which versions of 10g ( mine
> was the original release ), and WBEL ( the second in my case ).
Excuse me? I post *exactly* what is needed. I specify *exactly* the steps to take. I don't post the steps NOT to take, because there are rather a lot of them. Most of which you appear to have taken nevertheless. I have emails from over 60 people who have followed the advice and written to thank me for my clear, concise instructions. What is it, precisely, do you think, that makes you incapable of following what 60 other people have managed to follow to success?
>> The stress in the statement you appear to disagree with, in short, is >> in the word "accurately".
Uh huh. You're just someone Steve who can't follow instructions, so you blame the instructions. Go figure.
> If others with
> similar experience to me do the same as me, they will have the same
> problem. Guaranteed.
Yeah, sure. If 20 other people stumble around inventing things they don't read, I also guarantee they will have problems. Fortunately, my readers aren't all like that.
>> >> PS. I don't mean to sound defensive, though I probably do, but in the >> past three weeks I've performed six installations of 10g and two of >> 9i... and I used my own website to walk myself through them all (which >> is why the pages were written in the first place, of course). So it's >> not like this isn't repeatable, over and over.
Let's analyze that statement, shall we? You post in public that my instructions are wrong. That they don't work. It turns out that you think bits of them don't apply to you. You think that your 20 years' experience qualifies you to do things the instructions don't tell you to do. In fact, it turns out it's *you* that's at fault, not my instructions.
Do me a favour Steve: don't buy any flatpack furniture anytime soon. Or if you do, don't ask me to sit on any sofas you've built.
> I'm not perfect, and nor
> are you.
Non sequiteur and red herring. My state of perfection or lack thereof was never the issue. Your inability to follow simple instructions was.
> I've pointed out potential problems in reading your Oracle
> install on WBEL page out of context of the rest of your website. You can
> ignore my findings, or improve your site.
60+ versus 1. I think I'll draw the appropriate conclusion.
> Using your own work is like teting your own code. You know how it works,
> so you're not testing impartially.
60+ people, Steve, isn't just me.
> It's your call.
I've called it: it's you that's at fault. Now deal with it.
HJR Received on Wed Dec 08 2004 - 04:55:53 CST
 |
 |