On RedHat 5.1:
> We need three simple pieces of
> information from you:
>
> 1) Your system's libc version
/lib/libc.so.6 -> libc-2.0.7.so
> 2) Your system's libdl version
/lib/libdl.so.1 -> libdl.so.1.9.5
/lib/libdl.so.2 -> libdl-2.0.7.so
> 3) Whether you had to remove libc and libdl to make
I've got a Redhat 4.1 system with lots of random upgrades. All the
Blackdown JDKs that distributed their own libraries have worked out of
the box for me, including jdk 1.1.6v4a. I seem to have the same
library versions that the JDK distributes, maybe that's why there's no
problem.
> 1) Your syste
From: Steve Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Versioning -- Linux JDK needs your HELP!
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1998 09:48:43 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I am using RHL4.2 + jdk1.1.6v4a.
> 1) Your system's libc version
libc.so.5 -> libc.so.5.4.46
> 2) Your system's libdl version
libdl.
Steve Byrne wrote:
> We need three simple pieces of
> information from you:
>
> 1) Your system's libc version
libc.so.5 => libc.so.5.4.44
>
> 2) Your system's libdl version
libdl.so.1 => libdl.so.1.9.9
>
> 3) Whether you had to remove libc and libdl to make Java work for you
> Marcus> And no, I didn´t have to remove anything. But this may be
> Marcus> cause I installed the pre-packaged version of JDK. If I
> Marcus> had to remove anything the package maintainer probaly had
> Marcus> this done for me.
>
> Is that jdk1.1-1.1.6v4a-1 or above? If so, you'
Steve Byrne wrote:
> We need three simple pieces of
> information from you:
>
> 1) Your system's libc version
libc.so.5 -> libc.so.5.4.44
>
> 2) Your system's libdl version
libdl.so.1 -> libdl.so.1.9.9
>
> 3) Whether you had to remove libc and libdl to make Java work for you
yes. It was remo
> "Marcus" == Marcus Brito <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marcus> And no, I didn´t have to remove anything. But this may be
Marcus> cause I installed the pre-packaged version of JDK. If I
Marcus> had to remove anything the package maintainer probaly had
Marcus> this done for me.
My System: RedHat 5.1
1) libc => /lib/lib.so.6which is symlink to libc-2.0.7.so
2) libdl => /lib/libdl.so.2 which is symlink to libdl-2.0.7.so
3) No - I didn't have to delete anything. Java worked out of the box.
Rob
--
Rob Nugent
Development Manager
UniKix Technologies Europe
[EMAIL PRO
On Thu, 24 Sep 1998, Steve Byrne wrote:
> 1) Your system's libc version
> 2) Your system's libdl version
> 3) Whether you had to remove libc and libdl to make Java work for you
>
On a RedHat 4.2 with jdk-1.1.5-8.i386.rpm
epsilon (sorin):~>rpm -qa | grep jdk
jdk-1.1.5-8
epsilon (sorin):~>ldd /u
On my Slackware 3.5 system running jdk1.1.6v4a
>
>
> 1) Your system's libc version
libc.so.5 => libc.so.5.4.44
> 2) Your system's libdl version
libdl.so.1 => libdl.so.1.9.9
> 3) Whether you had to remove libc and libdl to make Java work for you
No. I did not.
On my Slackware 3.4 system ru
Steve Byrne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>We need three simple pieces of
>information from you:
Note: I am using Red Hat Linux release 4.1. Some weeks ago I tried to upgrade
to Red Hat 5.1. But I couldn't get Java to work. So I downgraded back to Red
Hat 4.1 and am waiting for you guys to get
11 matches
Mail list logo
