Oracle 8.1.7 on Fedora Core 2 aka tettnang

[Ken Rice]

Is it possible to install this release of Oracle on FC2? (9i or later isn't possible)

This is not for a Production Server, but for some quick testing.

I realize there is an issue with glibc:

[QUOTE]
Patch Description
-----------------
Oracle8i for Linux is shipped with archived objects which were compiled using
  glibc-2.1.3. The executable components are then linked at install-time using
  these archives. Due to compatibility limitations in glibc, if the target
  system for an installation is based on a later version of glibc, then the
  executables produced by the linker will not be valid. As a workaround to
  this limitation, we have created a set of stub libraries which are used at
  link-time only to mimic the contents of glibc-2.1.3 shared objects. Note
  that these stub libraries do not contain valid executable code, and therefore
  *must NOT* be included in the library path searched by the dynamic loader
  (i.e., do not include $ORACLE_HOME/lib/stubs in LD_LIBRARY_PATH
[/QUOTE]

Should I instead go back to say RedHat 9?

I can not obtain RHES or it's siblings for this test.

Thank you!

Ken Rice
TLC

[Benjamin Arai]

Most likely not because you don't have the source therefore, you would
most likely have inncompatable libraries.  Check and see if the
executables are dynamic or not using ldd.

On Thu, 2004-05-20 at 21:55, Ken Rice wrote:

>  Is it possible to install this release of Oracle on FC2? (9i or later
> isn't possible)
>  
>  This is not for a Production Server, but for some quick testing.
>  
>  I realize there is an issue with glibc:
>  
>  [QUOTE]
>  Patch Description
>  -----------------
>  Oracle8i for Linux is shipped with archived objects which were compiled using
>    glibc-2.1.3. The executable components are then linked at install-time using
>    these archives. Due to compatibility limitations in glibc, if the target
>    system for an installation is based on a later version of glibc, then the
>    executables produced by the linker will not be valid. As a workaround to
>    this limitation, we have created a set of stub libraries which are used at
>    link-time only to mimic the contents of glibc-2.1.3 shared objects. Note
>    that these stub libraries do not contain valid executable code, and therefore
>    *must NOT* be included in the library path searched by the dynamic loader
>    (i.e., do not include $ORACLE_HOME/lib/stubs in LD_LIBRARY_PATH
>  [/QUOTE]
>  
>  Should I instead go back to say RedHat 9?
>  
>  I can not obtain RHES or it's siblings for this test.
>  
>  Thank you!
>  
>  Ken Rice
>  TLC 
-- 
Benjamin Arai <benjamin(a)araisoft.com&gt;
Araisoft Corp.

[Alexander Dalloz]

Am Fr, den 21.05.2004 schrieb Ken Rice um 06:55:

>  Is it possible to install this release of Oracle on FC2? (9i or later
> isn't possible) 
>  Ken Rice 
Are you certain? Oracle 9i and 10g are installable on Fedora Core 1 at
least.

http://www.oracle-base.com/articles/9i/Oracle9iInstallationOnFedora1.php

http://www.oracle-base.com/articles/10g/OracleDB10gInstallationOnFedora1.php

So what's preventing from installing on Fedora Core 2?

Alexander


-- 
Alexander Dalloz | Enger, Germany | GPG key 1024D/ED695653 1999-07-13
Fedora GNU/Linux Core 1 (Yarrow) on Athlon CPU kernel 2.4.22-1.2188.nptl
Sirendipity 14:52:52 up 8 days, 12:37, load average: 1.76, 1.04, 0.94 
                   [ Γνωθι σ'αυτον - gnothi seauton ]
             my life is a planetarium - and you are the stars

[Ken Rice]

On Fri, 21 May 2004 14:54:21 +0200
Alexander Dalloz <alexander.dalloz(a)uni-bielefeld.de&gt; wrote:

>  Am Fr, den 21.05.2004 schrieb Ken Rice um 06:55:
>  
>  > Is it possible to install this release of Oracle on FC2? (9i or later isn't
> possible)
>  
>  > Ken Rice
>  
>  Are you certain? Oracle 9i and 10g are installable on Fedora Core 1 at
>  least.
>  
>  http://www.oracle-base.com/articles/9i/Oracle9iInstallationOnFedora1.php
>  
>  http://www.oracle-base.com/articles/10g/OracleDB10gInstallationOnFedora1.php
>  
>  So what's preventing from installing on Fedora Core 2? 
Sorry for the confusion. 9i and 10g are out of my picture. I must stay with 8i as that is
what my company's software
currently runs on. No other reason.

I will be exporting an Oracle 8i db that is currently running on Solaris 9 and will be
importing it onto a FC2 box running
Oracle 8i for Linux. We are then going to upgrade our software in parallel on both a SUN
UE450
and a DELL PE1650. I'm counting that the upgrade of our software that runs on top of
Oracle 8i will be
completed significantly faster on the Dell. (Stacking the deck here doesn't matter-our
inhouse DBA is still running an upgrade
on the SUN box for 11 days and counting!)

I have a shot here at demonstrating inhouse that db builds, etc., are "faster, more
robust, etc." when run
on a Linux server than if it is on Windows 2K3 (exact same hardware) or a UE450 or a
customer's SUN E5500. 

I picked FC2 as it is the basis for RHES and RHAS, and one or both are certified for
Oracle.

I have the glibc stub libraries as I noted in my first email. That's my concern, if
anyone has experience with Oracle 8i for Linux
installing/running on an very-current Distribution.
Here's what I found in a Gentoo Forum: 
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic.php?t=2915&highlight=oracle
It was done then. Could it be done now?

Thank you!

Ken Rice
TLC

[John Hearns]

On Fri, 2004-05-21 at 14:57, Ken Rice wrote:

>  I picked FC2 as it is the basis for RHES and RHAS, and one or both
> are certified for Oracle.
>   
Errrr.... I think you've got that wrong.
RH9 is closest to RHEL 3.

[Benjamin J. Weiss]

From: "Ken Rice" <krice(a)ServersAndSolutions.com&gt;
<snip>
>  I picked FC2 as it is the basis for RHES and RHAS, and one or both
> are 
certified for Oracle.

Actually, IIRC, RHEL ES 3.0 and RHEL AS 3.0 are both based on RHL 9.  Fedora
hasn't been out long enough to have been ported to an RHEL yet.

Ben

[Satish Balay]

On Fri, 21 May 2004, Benjamin J. Weiss wrote:

>  From: "Ken Rice" <krice(a)ServersAndSolutions.com&gt;
>  <snip>
>  > I picked FC2 as it is the basis for RHES and RHAS, and one or both are
>  certified for Oracle.
>  
>  Actually, IIRC, RHEL ES 3.0 and RHEL AS 3.0 are both based on RHL 9.  Fedora
>  hasn't been out long enough to have been ported to an RHEL yet. 
or go with RHEL clones CentOS/WBEL/TaoLinux..... this info was
repeated so many times on this list..

Satish

[Tom Mitchell]

On Fri, May 21, 2004 at 09:57:43AM -0400, Ken Rice wrote:
>  Alexander Dalloz <alexander.dalloz(a)uni-bielefeld.de&gt; wrote:
>  > Am Fr, den 21.05.2004 schrieb Ken Rice um 06:55:
>  >  
>  > > Is it possible to install this release of Oracle on FC2?
> (9i or
>  > > later isn't possible)
>  >  
....
>  >
> http://www.oracle-base.com/articles/10g/OracleDB10gInstallationOnFedora1.php
>  > 
>  > So what's preventing from installing on Fedora Core 2? 
...
>  Sorry for the confusion. 9i and 10g are out of my picture. I must
>  stay with 8i as that is what my company's software currently runs
>  on. No other reason. 
....

>  I will be exporting an Oracle 8i db that is currently running on
>  Solaris 9 and will be importing it onto a FC2 box running 
First ask other oracle folks (oracle and user groups).

I guess the question stands "... what's preventing from installing on
Fedora Core 2?"   What error do you get.

Perhaps if we decompose the problem....
  Is it the installation process that fails?
  Is it the runtime Java that fails?
  Is it bin tools that fail? (gawk, sh, bash, sed etc.)
  Is it the runtime Oracle that fails?

The only Linux Oracle experience I have is 9i.  There the install
process depends on a Java environment to do most of the hard work.  Is
that the component that is failing?

After Java had done it's work then there is a runtime link and
configuration step that involves the compiler, glibc, and other
'native' components including compatibility flags and libraries. Is
that what fails?

All have potential solutions that involve the installation of
run time libraries you might be able to solve them one at a time.

For debugging problems, do not ignore the text based install and tool options.
Display magic is one of the difficult porting issues.

Install as many 'compat' libraries and tool sets as you can find.
Things like compat-gcc, compat-libstdc++,....

Run strace -f -o /var/install-oracle-logfile 'install-oracle' and
follow the various twists and turns to see what libraries are involved
and where things break.  

Use the oracle-9i and other Linux install+update tricks from the net
as hints to short cut the list of things to try.

Some things might be resolved by compiling or copying OLD library packages
to FC2 and including them by specifying them for the runtime link loader.
Here are some 9i tricks I have in a file.
   # Use old Linuxthreads with floating stacks instead of
   # the new Native POSIX Thread Library (NPTL)
   export LD_ASSUME_KERNEL=2.4.1
   export THREADS_FLAG=native
   # Edit paths
   export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=/a/o9i/product/9.2/lib:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH
   export PATH=/a/o9i/product/9.2/bin:$PATH
Modify things as much as you can to make it 'look' native to Oracle.

Search for smaller historic update successes. i.e. 8i and a single
Linux version change.

If the problem seems to be in Java then try and debug that.  The big 
hitter for Java is threads.  Other Java and FCn issues are in the archives.

The last version of oracle 8i (R3) came out about Aug 2000.  Are you
running 8i-R3 or and older R1/R2.  R3 is nearly four years back....
Do evaluate your options you could be doing a lot of work to get the
old crud to run when a total update would be more cost effective!

   * consider an update to Oracle.
     i.e.  what breaks when you update Oracle?

   * consider the older Linux release (just firewall the box well).
     i.e. go or start with what works 

   * install on an old Linux/RH version and then update to current to debug.

   * find out what is driving the move from Solaris.
     expensive hardware, performance, expensive support, 
     -- talk to sun for a deal.
     expensive Oracle license?
     -- talk to Oracle
     client side compatibility issues?
     -- these are painful and require relentless attention.
   
Remember that Oracle 8i on Solaris and Linux may not be equal.  The
number of local modules and local changes may make a move to 10i as
easy as a move to Linux. Sometimes a bold update is less painful and
adds more clarity to the problems.

Oracle does a lot of things very well including Oracle to Oracle
interoperability.  What if the data base was migrated to a Linux box
running a current Oracle and the old Solaris simply connect to the
new box.  The interactive part might stay on Solaris and be migrated
later.


-- 
	T o m  M i t c h e l l 
	/dev/null the ultimate in secure storage.