Re: dsmc dumps core on Ubuntu 13.10 amd64

2013-11-06 Thread Christian Schmidt
Hi all, 05.11.2013 21:19, Stephan Rumpfhuber: I have exactly the same problem. I have several systems running ubuntu 13.10 but not all were affected. It seems to be that this have something todo with the password file and the client crashes when it tries to read or write the file (this just a

Re: dsmc dumps core on Ubuntu 13.10 amd64

2013-11-06 Thread Erwann Simon
Hi all, I'm not using a config file into /etc/ld.so.conf.d directory since I've experienced some conflicts with Debian 6 (libcrypto.so.0.9.8). I'm now using symlinks only, as the RPM package does : root@ubuntu:/opt/tivoli/tsm/client/ba/bin# ldd dsmc linux-vdso.so.1 =

Re: dsmc dumps core on Ubuntu 13.10 amd64

2013-11-06 Thread Malcolm Howe
This sounds like a problem we've seen which is described in APAR IC92662 http://www-01.ibm.com/support/docview.wss?uid=swg1IC92662myns=aparmynp=DOCTYPEstatusmync=E We've had to rename about 20% of the nodes running Ubuntu 13.04 or higher and Fedora 18 or higher. A small change to the name

Re: IBM Support Portal Search

2013-11-06 Thread Ryder, Michael S
Hi Angela This is one of the things that HP, I think, does well. Take a look at their Passport portal. One can check all the devices/applications they own or have interest in, and this can act as a filter when receiving alerts (for example, BIOS updates, bug-fixes, etc.) and when it's necessary

Re: dsmc dumps core on Ubuntu 13.10 amd64

2013-11-06 Thread Andreas Johansson
Hi Christian and list, 2013-11-05 18:31, Christian Schmidt skrev: we're trying to get dsmc running on a latest Ubuntu amd64 system. Converting the x86_64 rpm archives to deb packages and installing these worked fine. But whenever invoking dsmc we get the following messages: IBM Tivoli

Today's self-inflicted wound: IC90735

2013-11-06 Thread Nick Laflamme
After a few uneventful upgrades from 6.2 to 6.3 TSM servers in my most recent TSM shop, my first such upgrade for my current client hit IC90735: some clients using encryption don't correctly change to AES-128 and thus are rejected for invalid passwords. The APAR led to client changes, not server