Hello, On 07/23/2010 11:52 AM, Daniel Bareiro wrote: > On Friday, 23 July 2010 02:13:51 +0200, > Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > >> Hi there Daniel! > > Hi, Jeroen! > >>> But when trying to run the startup script, I get the following >>> errors: >>> >>> [r...@localhost scripts]# /etc/init.d/bacula start >>> Starting the Bacula Storage daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-sd: error while loading >>> shared libraries: >>> libbacpy-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory >>> Starting the Bacula File daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-fd: error while loading >>> shared libraries: >>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or >>> directory >>> Starting the Bacula Director daemon /usr/sbin/bacula-dir: error while >>> loading shared libraries: >>> libbacfind-5.0.1.so: cannot open shared object file: No such file or >>> directory >>> >>> But the files are: >>> >>> [r...@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so >>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 24083 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so >>> >>> [r...@localhost scripts]# ll /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so >>> -rwxr-xr-- 1 root root 228325 jul 22 12:25 /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so > >> Have you ran ldconfig? It generates the "available libraries" cache for the >> dynamic linker, and the dynamic linker is relatively strict about not >> searching various locations throughout the filesystem. >> >> You can verify dynamic linking capabilities with "ldd /path/to/binary". >> >> Also, you may want to consider Security Enhanced Linux. Verify with the >> "sestatus" command whether SELinux is enforcing the targeted policy, and if >> so, consider restoring the default context for the files freshly installed >> using restorecon, and if all else fails, please get back to us with ls -Z >> output ;-) > > I was also trying to install Bacula 5.0.1 using the same procedure as > mentioned in previous email and I have the same problem. This procedure > was successful in Debian with the difference that there I updated a > previous version instead of installing from scratch. > > Like I said, I followed the steps mentioned in the other email (I did > not run ldconfig manually) that had been successful in Debian. Using ldd > with these two libraries, I get the following: > > [r...@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacpy-5.0.1.so > libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b4eb5ee7000) > libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b4eb61e7000) > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b4eb646a000) > libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b4eb67c2000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000) > > [r...@localhost init.d]# ldd /usr/lib/libbacfind-5.0.1.so > libstdc++.so.6 => /usr/lib64/libstdc++.so.6 (0x00002b97a2131000) > libm.so.6 => /lib64/libm.so.6 (0x00002b97a2431000) > libc.so.6 => /lib64/libc.so.6 (0x00002b97a26b4000) > libgcc_s.so.1 => /lib64/libgcc_s.so.1 (0x00002b97a2a0c000) > /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2 (0x000000320a400000)
what is the output of 'ldd /usr/sbin/bacula-sd' ? > > Comparing this output with the one I get with the same version of Bacula > (5.0.1) installed with the same procedure in Debian, I'm seeing that in > both files are additionally a reference to linux-vdso.so.1. > > Can this be the cause of the problem? > > > Thanks for your reply. > > Regards, > Daniel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The Palm PDK Hot Apps Program offers developers who use the Plug-In Development Kit to bring their C/C++ apps to Palm for a share of $1 Million in cash or HP Products. Visit us here for more details: http://p.sf.net/sfu/dev2dev-palm _______________________________________________ Bacula-users mailing list Bacula-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bacula-users
